Recall expense

[Table of Contents](#i16ebb68f4bd84ff99a771b20ec27c3fc_7)Dollar Tree Active MattersThe Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) has alleged that we improperly sold certain topically applied, over the counter (“OTC”) products manufactured by certain Chinese factories that were on an import “alert” restriction issued by the FDA. We believe we have made significant improvements in our processes, and the FDA believes we have certain additional improvements to make, which we are addressing. Actual or threatened California state court lawsuits have been filed against Dollar Tree and Family Dollar for similar employment-related claims brought under the Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”). These cases may allege violations such as failure to provide employees with compliant rest and meal breaks, suitable seating and overtime pay, reimburse business expenses, pay minimum wages for all time worked, provide accurate wage statements, and timely pay wages as well as other off-the-clock and potential labor code violations.Three personal injury lawsuits are pending against us and our vendors alleging that certain talc products that were sold by the company in the past caused cancer. Although we have been able to resolve previous talc lawsuits against us without material loss to the company, given the inherent uncertainties of litigation there can be no assurances regarding the outcome of pending or future cases. Future costs to litigate these cases are not known but may be significant, and it is uncertain whether our costs will be covered by insurance. In addition, although we have indemnification rights against our vendors in several of these cases, it is uncertain whether the vendors will have the financial ability to carry out their obligations. Dollar Tree Resolved MattersIn December 2020, a former store manager brought a class action in California state court alleging we failed to reimburse employees for business expenses and in so failing, engaged in unfair competition. The case has been resolved.Family Dollar Active MattersOn February 11, 2022, the FDA issued Form 483 observations primarily regarding rodent infestation at our West Memphis, Arkansas distribution center (“DC 202”), as well as other items that require remediation. In connection therewith, we initiated a voluntary retail-level product recall of FDA and U.S. Department of Agriculture-regulated products stored and shipped from DC 202 from January 1, 2021 through February 18, 2022 (the “Recall”), temporarily closed DC 202 for extensive cleaning, temporarily closed the affected stores to permit the removal and destruction of inventory subject to the Recall, ceased sales of relevant inventory subject to the Recall, committed to the FDA to continue to cease the shipment of FDA-regulated products from DC 202 until FDA approval is received, and initiated corrective actions at DC 202 intended to ensure that these issues will not recur when shipment of FDA-regulated products recommences. We are taking this matter extremely seriously, and are responding to all observations made in the Form 483. We are cooperating fully with the FDA, and intend to cooperate fully with any other applicable regulatory body. We recorded total charges of approximately $34.1 million in the fourth quarter of our 2021 fiscal year in connection with the Recall, primarily attributable to inventory markdowns and related costs. The circumstances leading to the Recall (and/or the Recall itself) may have other negative impacts, which could include reputational damage, lost sales, further or additional governmental investigations and/or enforcement actions, and/or private litigation (see below), which could have a material adverse effect, individually or collectively, on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.We have received the following class action complaints related to issues associated with DC 202 (and anticipate additional lawsuits of a similar nature):On February 22, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the Circuit Court of Pope County, Arkansas, alleging various causes of action on behalf of the citizens of Arkansas who purchased “contaminated products” covered by the Recall from January 1, 2021 through the date of such Recall. Plaintiffs seek restitution, disgorgement, damages, attorney fees, costs and expenses, punitive damages and such further relief (in each case in unspecified amounts), as the Court deems just and proper.On February 23, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Northern Division, alleging various causes of action related to the sale of products that may be contaminated by virtue of a rodent infestation and other unsanitary conditions in stores throughout Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Missouri and Tennessee. Plaintiffs seek damages, attorney fees and costs, punitive damages and the replacement of, or refund of money paid to purchase the relevant products, and any other legal relief available for their claims (in each case in unspecified amounts), including equitable and injunctive relief.On February 25, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, on behalf of all persons who purchased products subject to the Recall (with a subclass for all persons residing in the State of Tennessee who purchased products subject to the Recall), alleging breach of the implied warranty of merchantability and unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs seek restitution, damages, interest, punitive damages, attorney fees, costs and expenses, and such further relief (in each case in unspecified amounts), as the Court deems just and equitable.55
