COLGATE PALMOLIVE COCL
COLGATE PALMOLIVE CO Commitments Disclosure
Commitments and Contingencies
As of December 31, 2025, the Company has various contractual commitments for future multi-year purchases of raw, packaging and other materials and services totaling approximately $637.
As a global company serving consumers in more than 200 countries and territories, the Company is routinely subject to a wide variety of legal proceedings. These include disputes relating to intellectual property, contracts, product liability, marketing, advertising, foreign exchange controls, antitrust and trade regulation, labor and employment, pension and benefits, data privacy and security, environmental and tax matters and consumer class actions. In addition, management proactively reviews and monitors the Company’s exposure to, and the impact of, environmental matters. The Company is party to various environmental matters and, as such, may be responsible for all or a portion of the cleanup, restoration and post-closure monitoring of several sites.
The Company establishes accruals for loss contingencies when it has determined that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss, or range of loss, can be reasonably estimated. Any such accruals are adjusted thereafter as appropriate to reflect changes in circumstances. The Company does not accrue for legal defense costs, which are recognized as incurred when the legal services are provided.
The Company also determines estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of reasonably possible losses in excess of related accrued liabilities, if any, when it has determined that a loss is reasonably possible and it is able to determine such estimates. For those matters disclosed below for which the amount of any reasonably possible losses can be reasonably estimated, the Company currently estimates that the aggregate range of reasonably possible losses in excess of any accrued liabilities is $0 to approximately $225 (based on current exchange rates). The estimates included in this amount are based on the Company’s analysis of currently available information and, as new information is obtained, these estimates may change. Due to the inherent subjectivity of the assessments and the unpredictability of outcomes of legal proceedings, any amounts accrued or included in this aggregate range may not represent the ultimate loss to the Company. Thus, the Company’s exposure and ultimate losses may be higher or lower, and possibly significantly so, than the amounts accrued or the range disclosed above.
Based on current knowledge, management does not believe that the ultimate resolution of loss contingencies arising from the matters discussed herein will have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position or its ongoing results of operations or cash flows. However, in light of the inherent uncertainties noted above, an adverse outcome in one or more matters could be material to the Company’s results of operations or cash flows for any particular quarter or year.
Brazilian Matters
There are certain tax and civil proceedings outstanding, as described below, related to the Company’s 1995 acquisition of the Kolynos oral care business from Wyeth (the “Seller”).
The Brazilian internal revenue authority has disallowed interest deductions and foreign exchange losses taken by the Company’s Brazilian subsidiary for certain years in connection with the financing of the Kolynos acquisition. The tax assessments with interest, penalties and any court-mandated fees, at the current exchange rate, are approximately $97. This amount includes additional assessments received from the Brazilian internal revenue authority in April 2016 relating to net operating loss carryforwards used by the Company’s Brazilian subsidiary to offset taxable income that had also been deducted from the authority’s original assessments. The Company has been disputing the disallowances by appealing the assessments since October 2001.
Following adverse administrative decisions, the Company filed five cases in the Lower Federal Courts in the City of São Paulo (the “Lower Federal Court”) in October 2015, March 2017, October 2018, June 2019 and September 2020. Of those five cases, currently one case is pending in the Lower Federal Court and four cases have been appealed to the Federal Court of Appeals. Of the four cases pending in the Federal Court of Appeals, one case was appealed by the Brazilian federal government following a ruling in favor of the Company in the Lower Federal Court and three were appealed by the Company following rulings against the Company in the Lower Federal Court. In December 2025, in one of these three cases, the Federal Court of Appeals ruled against the Company with respect to the deductibility of the corporate income tax for the years 1999 through 2001. The amount at issue in this case, with interest and any court-mandated fees, at the current exchange rate, is approximately $18. The Company has filed a motion for clarification with the Federal Court of Appeals and, if necessary following resolution of that motion, will seek a further appeal to the Superior Court of Justice. Although there can be no assurances, management believes, based on the opinion of its Brazilian legal counsel, that it has strong legal grounds to contest these matters, and it is more likely than not that the Company will ultimately prevail. The Company is challenging these matters vigorously.
In July 2002, the Brazilian Federal Public Attorney filed a case against the federal government of Brazil, Laboratorios Wyeth-Whitehall Ltda. (the Brazilian subsidiary of the Seller) and the Company’s Brazilian subsidiary in the Lower Federal Court, seeking to annul an April 2000 decision by the Brazilian Board of Tax Appeals that found in favor of the Seller’s Brazilian subsidiary on the issue of whether it had incurred taxable capital gains as a result of the divestiture of Kolynos. The case seeks to make the Company’s Brazilian subsidiary jointly and severally liable for any tax due from the Seller’s Brazilian subsidiary. The case has been pending since 2002, and the Lower Federal Court has not issued a decision. Although there can be no assurances, management believes, based on the opinion of its Brazilian legal counsel, that it has strong legal grounds to contest this matter and it is more likely than not that the Company will ultimately prevail. The Company is challenging this matter vigorously.
In December 2005, the Brazilian internal revenue authority issued to the Company’s Brazilian subsidiary a tax assessment with interest and any court-mandated fees of approximately $26, at the current exchange rate, based on a claim that certain purchases of U.S. Treasury bills by the subsidiary and their subsequent disposition during the period 2000 to 2001 were subject to a tax on foreign exchange transactions. Following adverse administrative decisions, in January 2016, the Company filed a case in the Lower Federal Court. In the event the Company is unsuccessful in this case, further appeals are available. Although there can be no assurances, management believes, based on the opinion of its Brazilian legal counsel, that it has strong legal grounds to contest this matter and it is more likely than not that the Company will ultimately prevail. The Company is challenging this matter vigorously. In addition, in April 2024, based upon changes in Brazilian tax law, the Company filed a petition in this matter requesting that the penalty portion of the claim be removed. The Brazilian tax authority agreed with the Company’s position and, in March 2025, reduced its claim in this matter.
Talcum Powder Matters
The Company has been named as a defendant in civil actions alleging that certain of its talcum powder products were contaminated with asbestos and/or caused mesothelioma and other cancers. Many of these actions involve a number of co-defendants from a variety of different industries, including suppliers of asbestos and manufacturers of products that, unlike the Company’s products, were designed to contain asbestos.
As of December 31, 2025, there were 454 individual cases pending against the Company in state and federal courts throughout the United States, as compared to 308 cases as of December 31, 2024. During the year ended December 31, 2025, 253 new cases were filed and 107 cases were resolved by voluntary dismissal, settlement or dismissal by the court. The value of the settlements in the periods presented was not material, either individually or in the aggregate, to such period's results of operations.
The Company and its legal counsel believe that the Company has strong legal grounds to contest these cases and is challenging them vigorously. Given the inherent uncertainties of litigation, the Company cannot predict the outcome of all individual cases pending against it, and is only able to make an estimate for those cases that have advanced to the later stages of legal proceedings. For the remaining cases, the Company includes in the range of reasonably possible losses in excess of accrued liabilities stated above an aggregated amount that takes into account historical outcomes of the Company’s cases.
As of December 31, 2025, a portion of the Company’s costs incurred in defending and resolving these claims has been, and the Company believes will continue to be, covered by insurance policies issued by several primary, excess and umbrella insurance carriers, subject to exhaustion, deductibles, exclusions, retentions, policy limits and insurance carrier insolvencies.
ERISA Matter
In June 2016, a lawsuit was filed in the District Court against the Retirement Plan, the Company and certain individuals claiming that residual annuity payments associated with a 2005 residual annuity amendment to the Retirement Plan were improperly calculated for certain Retirement Plan participants in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. The relief sought included recalculation of benefits, pre- and post-judgment interest and attorneys’ fees.
Following adverse decisions by the District Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the Company recorded charges to earnings of $267 in the quarter ended March 31, 2023 and $65 in the quarter ended March 31, 2025 to reflect the then current estimated increase in pension plan liability and other related costs. In the three months ended September 30, 2025, the parties entered into a settlement agreement to fully resolve the litigation for $332, inclusive of attorneys’ fees and costs. In January 2026, the District Court granted final approval of the settlement. In February 2026, the District Court granted plaintiffs’ request to allocate $99 of the settlement amount for plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and costs. These attorneys’ fees and costs will be paid by the Company, while the remainder of the settlement amount will be funded by the Plan. The litigation resulted in an increase in the obligations of the Retirement Plan and, based on the current funded status of the Retirement Plan, required immaterial cash contributions by the Company in 2025 and will require additional immaterial cash contributions by the Company in 2026.Historical Timeline
| Fiscal Year | Filed | |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Feb 23, 2026 | Showing above |
| 2024 | Feb 13, 2025 | |
| 2023 | Feb 15, 2024 | |
| 2022 | Feb 16, 2023 | |
| 2021 | Feb 17, 2022 | |
| 2020 | Feb 18, 2021 | |
| 2019 | Feb 21, 2020 | |
| 2018 | Feb 21, 2019 | |
| 2017 | Feb 15, 2018 | |
| 2016 | Feb 23, 2017 | |
| 2015 | Feb 18, 2016 | |
About Commitments Disclosures
Commitments and contingencies disclosures catalog a company's off-balance-sheet obligations and legal exposures — purchase commitments, guarantee arrangements, pending litigation, and regulatory proceedings. These items represent potential future cash outflows that may not appear as liabilities on the balance sheet until they become probable and estimable.
Key signals: litigation reserves and disclosed loss ranges quantify management's estimate of legal exposure, but unquantified "reasonably possible" losses often represent the larger risk. Watch for changes in language around pending cases — shifts from "remote" to "reasonably possible" or increases in estimated loss ranges signal deteriorating outcomes. Unconditional purchase obligations and take-or-pay contracts create fixed cost structures that reduce operational flexibility. Guarantee arrangements for subsidiaries or joint ventures can create cascading obligations. Compare the total commitment schedule against projected free cash flow to assess whether the company can meet its obligations without additional financing.