Case file
- Court
- U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
- At stake
- "Millions of dollars" in alleged overcharges; remedies sought not yet disclosed
- Status
- Complaint filed 26 October 2026; pending
The Federal Trade Commission and 20 states filed suit against Dollar General on 26 October in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, where the retailer is headquartered. The Commission voted 2-0 to authorize the complaint against the chain, which operates more than 21,000 stores.
The allegations. According to the plaintiffs, Dollar General charged shoppers more at checkout than its shelf prices for years and allowed pricing errors to persist, collecting "millions of dollars through illegal overcharges" across thousands of stores. The complaint cites tens of thousands of consumer complaints that the company would not honour advertised prices, state inspections the retailer failed, and undercover purchases made by the FTC. Sections describing what the company knew are redacted. The plaintiffs allege violations of the FTC Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and state laws.
The plaintiffs. Alongside the FTC: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah and Wisconsin — a coalition spanning both Republican- and Democratic-led states.
The FTC's position. "Dollar General has betrayed the trust of millions of American consumers," said Christopher Mufarrige, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection.
Dollar General's position. The company had not responded to media requests for comment at the time of publication.
Not the first time. Since 2019 Dollar General has settled pricing-accuracy claims with six states for a combined $6 million. The new case is different in scale: a federal regulator and 20 states at once.
Why it matters. Dollar General's stores are concentrated in small towns and rural areas where shoppers often have no nearby alternative. A gap between the shelf tag and the receipt is a direct loss that is easy to miss. The case tests whether a major chain can treat such discrepancies as technical glitches.
What next. The remedies sought have not been disclosed in public reports. The case is at an early stage, and any liability is for the court to decide. This page will be updated.
Sources
Most sources are in Russian.
Kurs Media editorial team. Corrections and statements from the parties: press@kursmedia.com. Read in Russian.