COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	3 Months Ended
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	Mar. 31, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	16. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Griddle Product Recall and Related Costs On October 18, 2024, the Company initiated a voluntary recall of certain frozen waffle products produced at its Brantford, Ontario, Canada facility, and on October 22, 2024, the Company expanded its voluntary recall to include all products manufactured at the Brantford facility that are still within their shelf-life. These frozen griddle products may have had the potential to be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. The Company recorded a product recall liability for estimated product returns and claims, which is included within Accrued expenses in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, of $12.8 million as of March 31, 2025 and $9.6 million as of December 31, 2024. The Company is seeking to recover the recall-related costs through its insurance coverage, and such recoveries are recorded in the period in which the recoveries are determined to be probable of realization. The amount of the product recall liability represents the probable and reasonably estimable costs directly associated with the recall. However, the total actual costs could differ materially due to uncertainties related to customer return rates, additional recall expenses, litigation, or other unforeseen events. Shareholder Derivative Actions The Company, as nominal defendant, and certain of its former officers are parties to a consolidated shareholder derivative suit captioned Wells and the City of Ann Arbor Employees’ Retirement System v. Reed, et al., Case Nos. 2016-CH-16359 and 2019-CH-06753 (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois). The consolidated lawsuit alleges that TreeHouse, under the authority and control of the individual defendants: (i) made certain false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and future prospects; and (ii) failed to disclose that (a) the Company's private label business was underperforming; (b) the Company's Flagstone Foods business was underperforming; (c) the Company's acquisition strategy was underperforming; (d) the Company had overstated its full-year 2016 guidance; and (e) TreeHouse's statements lacked reasonable basis. The complaints allege, among other things, that these actions artificially inflated the market price of TreeHouse common stock and resulted in harm to the Company. On August 26, 2022, plaintiffs in the consolidated Wells case filed a second consolidated amended complaint, which was dismissed in its entirety with prejudice on March 15, 2023. The plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal on March 16, 2023. On March 22, 2024, the Appellate Court reversed the state trial court’s dismissal of the consolidated amended complaint and remanded to the state trial court for further proceedings. On October 1, 2024, the parties advised the state trial court of their agreement in principle to settle the action, and on the same day, the court entered an order staying all proceedings pending the submission of a motion for preliminary settlement approval. On December 18, 2024, the court entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement, and final settlement approval was granted on April 2, 2025. Other Claims In February 2014, TreeHouse, along with its 100% owned subsidiaries, Bay Valley Foods, LLC and Sturm Foods, Inc., filed suit against Keurig Dr. Pepper Inc.'s wholly-owned subsidiary, Keurig Green Mountain ("KGM"), in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York captioned TreeHouse Foods, Inc. et al. v. Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. et al. asserting claims under the federal antitrust laws, various state antitrust laws and unfair competition statutes, contending that KGM had monopolized alleged markets for single serve coffee brewers and single serve coffee pods. The Company is seeking monetary damages, declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and attorneys' fees, which monetary damages, in August 2020, were estimated by the Company's economic expert to be in the range of $719.4 million to $1.5 billion for the Company's antitrust claims, before trebling, and $358.0 million for a subset of the Company's false advertising claims, without accounting for discretionary trebling by the Court. The matter remains pending, with summary judgment motions fully briefed. On March 28, 2022, the Magistrate Judge issued an Opinion and Order granting in part and denying in part the TreeHouse sanctions motion against KGM and denying the KGM sanctions motion against TreeHouse. KGM has appealed a portion of the Opinion and Order awarding sanctions to the Company. On January 3, 2025, the Court denied KGM's motions to exclude the opinions of the Company's experts and granted Plaintiffs' motion to exclude the opinion of KGM's sham litigation expert. KGM is denying the allegations made by the Company in the litigation. The Company has not recorded any amount in its Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements as of March 31, 2025. In addition, the Company is party in the ordinary course of business to certain claims, litigation, audits, and investigations. The Company will record an accrual for a loss contingency when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company believes it has established adequate accruals for liabilities that are probable and reasonably estimable that may be incurred in connection with any such currently pending or threatened matter. In the Company's opinion, the eventual resolution of such matters, either individually or in the aggregate, is not expected to have a material impact on the Company's financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. However, litigation is inherently unpredictable and resolutions or dispositions of claims or lawsuits by settlement or otherwise could have an adverse impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows for the reporting period in which any such resolution or disposition occurs.