XML 46 R26.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.25.4

Commitments and Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 28, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies The Company and/or certain of its subsidiaries are involved from time to time in various lawsuits and claims relating to product liability, labeling, marketing, advertising, pricing, intellectual property, commercial contracts, foreign exchange controls, antitrust and trade regulation, labor and employment, securities transactions and related disclosures, indemnification, information technology systems, data privacy and cybersecurity, environmental, health and safety, tax matters, governmental investigations, and other legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of their business. The Company records accruals for loss contingencies associated with these legal matters when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. As of December 28, 2025, the Company has determined that the liabilities associated with certain litigation matters are probable and can be reasonably estimated. The Company has accordingly accrued for those contingent liabilities and will continue to monitor each related legal issue and adjust accruals as might be warranted based on new information and further developments. Accrued liabilities related to litigation matters are included in Accrued liabilities and Other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. For these and other litigation and regulatory matters discussed below for which a loss is probable or reasonably possible, the Company is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss beyond the amounts accrued. Amounts accrued for legal contingencies often result from a complex series of judgments about future events and uncertainties that rely heavily on estimates and assumptions including timing of related payments. The ability to make such estimates and judgments can be affected by various factors including whether, among other things, damages sought in the proceedings are unsubstantiated or indeterminate; scientific and legal discovery has commenced or is complete; proceedings are in early stages; matters present legal uncertainties; significant facts are in dispute; procedural or jurisdictional issues exist; the number of potential claims is certain or predictable; comprehensive multi-party settlements are achievable; there are complex related cross-claims and counterclaims; and/or there are numerous parties involved. In the Company’s opinion, based on its examination of these matters, its experience to date and discussions with counsel, the ultimate outcome of legal proceedings, net of liabilities accrued on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position. However, the resolution of, or increase in accruals for, one or more of these matters in any reporting period may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations and cash flows for that period. Product Liability The Company and/or certain of its subsidiaries are involved in numerous product liability claims and lawsuits involving multiple products. Claimants in these cases seek substantial compensatory and, where available, punitive or exemplary damages or legal fees. While the Company believes it has substantial defenses, it is not feasible to predict the ultimate outcome of litigation. From time to time, even if it has substantial defenses, the Company considers isolated settlements based on a variety of circumstances. The Company may accrue an estimate of the legal defense costs needed to defend each matter when those costs are probable and can be reasonably estimated. For certain of these matters, the Company may accrue additional amounts such as estimated costs associated with settlements, damages, and other losses. Product liability accruals can represent projected product liability for thousands of claims around the world, each in different litigation environments and with different fact patterns. Changes to the accruals may be required in the future as additional information becomes available. Claims for personal injury have been made against the Company’s subsidiary Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., now known as Kenvue Brands LLC (“JJCI”), along with other third-party sellers of acetaminophen-containing products, in federal court alleging that in utero exposure to acetaminophen (the active ingredient in Tylenol®, an over-the-counter (“OTC”) pain medication) is associated with the development of autism spectrum disorder and/or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children. In October 2022, lawsuits filed in federal courts in the United States were organized as a multi-district litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. In February 2024, the court entered final judgment in favor of JJCI and the other sellers of acetaminophen-containing products and dismissed the majority of cases then pending in the multi-district litigation. A Notice of Appeal was filed for those cases in March 2024. In August 2024, all remaining cases then pending in the multi-district litigation were dismissed. As of December 2024, all cases were on appeal. Product liability lawsuits continue to be filed, and the Company continues to receive information with respect to potential costs and the anticipated number of cases. In addition, lawsuits have been filed in state court against JJCI, the Company, and J&J. Lawsuits have also been filed in Canada against the Company’s subsidiary Johnson & Johnson Inc. (Canadian affiliate), now known as Kenvue Canada Inc. (“JJI”), and J&J. At this stage in these proceedings, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate either the likelihood or the magnitude of its potential liability arising out of these claims and lawsuits. In October 2025, the State of Texas filed a petition in the District Court of Panola County, Texas, against the Company, Kenvue Brands LLC (formerly known as Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.) and J&J, alleging violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (the “DTPA”) and the Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (the “TUFTA”) relating to allegations that prenatal and early-childhood exposure to acetaminophen is associated with autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, civil penalties, disgorgement of assets, and other remedies. In November 2025, the TUFTA and DTPA claims against the Company and J&J were dismissed and the TUFTA claims against Kenvue Brands LLC were dismissed. A Notice of Appeal was filed in December 2025. At this stage in these proceedings, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate the likelihood or magnitude of potential liability arising from this matter. In October 2025, claims for personal injury and, in some cases, consequential death, were brought in the Business and Property Courts in Manchester (Circuit Commercial Court, KBD) against Kenvue UK Limited, J&J, and J&J’s subsidiary, Johnson & Johnson Management Limited, in respect of Johnson’s® Baby Powder. In December 2025, the claims were transferred to the Civil List of the King’s Bench Division in London. The claimants allege they developed mesothelioma, ovarian cancer, lung granulomata, lung fibrosis, and/or uterine fibroids as a result of exposure to Johnson’s® Baby Powder. The claimants claim that the defendants are liable for negligence and the tort of deceit. Additionally, in February 2026, an Australian law firm announced it has commenced a proceeding in the Supreme Court of Australia against J&J and the Company’s affiliates Johnson & Johnson Pty Ltd and Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Limited. The claimants allege they developed cancer as a result of exposure to talc-based products. The proceedings have not been served. At this stage in these proceedings, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate either the likelihood or the magnitude of its potential liability arising out of these claims. General Litigation In 2006, J&J acquired Pfizer’s OTC business including the U.S. rights to OTC Zantac, which were on-sold to Boehringer Ingelheim (“BI”) as a condition to merger control approval such that BI assumed product liability risk for U.S. sales from and after December 2006. J&J received indemnification from BI and gave Pfizer indemnification in connection with the transfer of the Zantac business to BI from Pfizer, through J&J. In November 2019, J&J received a demand for indemnification from Pfizer, pursuant to the 2006 Stock and Asset Purchase Agreement between J&J and Pfizer. In January 2020, J&J received a demand for indemnification from BI, pursuant to the 2006 Asset Purchase Agreement among J&J, Pfizer, and BI. Pursuant to the agreements, Pfizer and BI have asserted indemnification claims against J&J ostensibly related to Zantac sales by Pfizer. In November 2022, J&J received a demand for indemnification from GlaxoSmithKline LLC, pursuant to the 2006 Stock and Asset Purchase Agreement between J&J and Pfizer, and certain 1993, 1998, and 2002 agreements between Glaxo Wellcome and Warner-Lambert entities. The notices seek indemnification for legal claims related to OTC Zantac (ranitidine) products. Plaintiffs in the underlying actions allege that Zantac and other OTC medications that contain ranitidine may degrade and result in unsafe levels of NDMA (N-nitrosodimethylamine) and can cause or have caused various cancers in individuals using the products and seek declaratory and monetary relief. J&J has rejected all the demands for indemnification relating to the underlying actions. No J&J entity sold Zantac in the United States. In 2016, JJI sold the Canadian Zantac business to Sanofi Consumer Health, Inc. (“Sanofi”). Under the 2016 Asset Purchase Agreement between JJI and Sanofi (the “2016 Purchase Agreement”), Sanofi assumed certain liabilities including those pertaining to Zantac (ranitidine) product sold by Sanofi after closing and losses arising from or relating to recalls, withdrawals, replacements, or related market actions or post-sale warning in respect of products sold by Sanofi after the closing, and JJI is required to indemnify Sanofi for certain other excluded liabilities. In November 2019, JJI received a notice reserving rights to claim indemnification from Sanofi pursuant to the 2016 Purchase Agreement. The notice refers to indemnification for legal claims in class actions and various individual personal injury actions with similar allegations to the U.S. litigation related to OTC Zantac (ranitidine) products. Beginning in 2019, multiple putative class actions naming J&J and/or JJI were filed in Canada with similar allegations regarding Zantac or ranitidine use. JJI is named in one of the two outstanding putative class actions. The outstanding putative class action naming JJI has been stayed in the Quebec Superior Court. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice action, which named J&J and JJI and was previously pending, was discontinued by court order in May 2025. JJI was also named as a defendant, along with other manufacturers, in various personal injury actions in Canada related to Zantac products. JJI has provided Sanofi notice reserving rights to claim indemnification pursuant to the 2016 Purchase Agreement related to the class actions and personal injury actions. At this stage in these proceedings, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate either the likelihood or the magnitude of its potential liability arising out of these claims and lawsuits. In September 2023, the Nonprescription Drugs Advisory Committee (the “NDAC”) of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) met to discuss new data on the effectiveness of orally administered phenylephrine (“PE”) and concluded that the current scientific data do not support that the recommended dosage of orally administered PE is effective as a nasal decongestant. Neither the FDA nor the NDAC raised concerns about safety issues with use of oral PE at the recommended dose. In November 2024, the FDA issued a proposed order to remove the ingredient from the OTC monograph. Beginning in September 2023, following the NDAC vote, putative class actions were filed against the Company and its affiliates, along with other third-party sellers and manufacturers of PE-containing products, asserting various causes of action including violation of consumer protection statutes, negligence, and unjust enrichment. The complaints seek damages and injunctive relief. In December 2023, lawsuits filed in federal courts in the United States were organized as a multi-district litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. In November 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York dismissed plaintiffs’ streamlined complaint, and a Notice of Appeal was filed in December 2024. Separately, putative Canadian class actions were filed beginning in September 2023 against the Company, JJI, and JJCI, along with other third-party sellers and manufacturers of PE-containing products, alleging false, misleading representations, and seeking damages and declaratory relief based on similar causes of action. In December 2024, a representative action was filed in the Federal Court of Australia, Victoria Registry, against the Company’s subsidiary Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Limited alleging contraventions of the consumer guarantees regime and seeking damages and associated relief based on broadly similar causes of action to those in the United States. In February 2025, a representative action was filed in the High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry against Johnson & Johnson (New Zealand) Limited and the Company’s subsidiaries JNTL Consumer Health (New Zealand) Limited and Johnson & Johnson Pacific Pty Limited, alleging breaches of the Fair Trading Act 1986 and the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993. Additionally, beginning in October 2023, two putative securities class actions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against the Company and certain of its officers, among other defendants. In December 2023, the two cases were consolidated as In re Kenvue Inc. Securities Litigation and a lead plaintiff was appointed. In March 2024, a consolidated amended complaint was filed that named the Company’s directors as defendants in addition to the defendants named in the initial complaints. The consolidated amended complaint brings claims under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. It alleges that the Company’s registration statements and prospectuses filed with the SEC in connection with the Kenvue IPO on Form S-1 and the Exchange Offer on Form S-4 contained misleading statements and omissions about PE. It seeks damages for all shareholders who acquired shares pursuant to the Kenvue IPO and the Exchange Offer registration statements and prospectuses. In January 2024, shareholder derivative complaints were filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against the Company as the nominal defendant and the Company’s directors and certain of its officers as defendants, among other defendants. The derivative complaints allege breaches of fiduciary duties based on disclosures in the Company’s SEC filings regarding PE, and they seek damages and equitable relief. The derivative complaints have been consolidated as In re Kenvue, Inc. Derivative Litigation and have been stayed. At this stage in these proceedings, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate either the likelihood or the magnitude of its potential liability arising out of these claims and lawsuits. In March 2024, following the filing of a Citizen Petition with the FDA by Valisure LLC that included testing results purporting to show that benzoyl peroxide (“BPO”) OTC acne products can degrade into benzene at levels well above the alleged limit of two parts per million, putative class actions were filed against the Company and its affiliates, along with other third-party sellers and manufacturers of BPO-containing acne products, asserting various causes of action including violation of consumer protection statutes, negligence, breach of express and implied warranties, and unjust enrichment. The complaints, pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, seek damages and injunctive relief. At this stage in these proceedings, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate either the likelihood or the magnitude of its potential liability arising out of these claims and lawsuits. JJCI, along with more than 120 other companies, is a defendant in a cost recovery action brought by Occidental Chemical Corporation in June 2018 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, related to the clean-up of a section of the Lower Passaic River in New Jersey. Certain defendants (not including JJCI) have executed a settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Justice, which was confirmed through a judicial Consent Decree in December 2024. A Notice of Appeal was filed in January 2025. The cost recovery case has been administratively closed but can be re-opened upon request. The Company or its subsidiaries are also parties to various proceedings brought under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, commonly known as Superfund, and comparable state, local, or foreign laws in which the primary relief sought is the Company’s agreement to implement environmental investigation and remediation activities at designated hazardous waste sites or to reimburse the government or third parties for the costs they have incurred in performing investigation, oversight, or remediation at such sites. Other A significant number of personal injury claims alleging that talc causes cancer were made against J&J and certain of its current and former affiliates, including the Company, arising out of the use of body powders containing talc, primarily Johnson’s® Baby Powder. These personal injury suits were and continue to be filed primarily in state and federal courts in the United States and in Canada, although suits have been filed in other jurisdictions as well. Pursuant to the Separation Agreement, J&J has retained all liabilities on account of or relating to harm arising out of, based upon, or resulting from, directly or indirectly, the presence of or exposure to talc or talc-containing products sold by J&J or its affiliates in the United States and Canada (the “Talc-Related Liabilities”) and, as a result, has agreed to indemnify the Company for the Talc-Related Liabilities and any costs associated with resolving such claims, including matters that have commenced in the United States and Canada naming the Company or its affiliates. The Company will, however, remain responsible for all liabilities on account of or relating to harm arising out of, based upon, or resulting from, directly or indirectly, the presence of or exposure to talc or talc-containing products sold outside the United States or Canada.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for legal proceedings, legal contingencies, litigation, regulatory and environmental matters and other contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_LegalMattersAndContingenciesTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration