Litigation Shifts the Risk Landscape for Ultra-Processed Foods
The first government-led lawsuit against ultra-processed food manufacturers, filed in December 2025, marks a sharp escalation in liability risk for the food industry, according to research from the Swiss Re Institute. The suit arrives amid tightening regulatory oversight that increasingly rejects industry self-regulation.
Litigation over ultra-processed foods has fundamentally transformed from struggling individual injury claims to more promising public cost recovery strategies, Swiss Re said.
A 2024 lawsuit viewed as a test case, Martinez vs. Kraft Heinz Co., sought compensation from multiple food companies for a teenager whose health problems allegedly stemmed from consuming ultra-processed foods over many years. But the lawsuit failed to survive early motions when dismissed in August 2025.
The court found the plaintiff could not establish specific causation or identify the exact harmful products consumed — a hurdle that has plagued previous food industry litigation dating back to early 2000s fast-food obesity cases, according to Swiss Re.
But a December 2025 lawsuit filed by the San Francisco City Attorney against major ultra-processed food manufacturers marks a departure from that playbook, according to Swiss Re.
Rather than asking juries to connect specific diseases to specific products, the government lawsuit employs two distinct legal frameworks: unfair competition claims based on alleged deceptive marketing practices, and public nuisance theories traditionally associated with tobacco and opioid litigation. By shifting focus to misleading conduct and its marketplace effects rather than disease causation, plaintiffs can sidestep the scientific and evidentiary challenges that derailed prior cases against food manufacturers, the report said.
The legal strategy change carries real implications. Plaintiffs can now emphasize internal corporate knowledge, the gap between what companies knew and what they communicated, and government response costs rather than individual diagnoses.
Mounting Regulatory Pressure and Market Realities
The regulatory environment is accelerating simultaneously with litigation, Swiss Re said. The Make America Healthy Again Commission has publicly alleged that ultra-processed foods contribute to deteriorating child health. in addition, the U.S. government’s 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines for Americans introduced significant revisions including new guidance to limit highly processed foods — a departure from the incremental updates that characterized prior editions.
Meanwhile, several states are moving unilaterally, the report said. California has established reporting requirements for school food vendors set to take effect by 2028, requiring comprehensive documentation of ingredient lists and nutritional information. Texas has gone further, requiring disclosure labels on foods containing any of 44 specific ingredients. These regulatory demands create compliance exposure beyond litigation itself.
The market context makes the liability concern particularly acute. Younger Americans ages 1 to 18 derive 61.9% of their calories from ultra-processed foods, while ultra-processed foods account for more than 50% of total energy intake in high-income countries including the U.S. and United Kingdom. The scale of consumption creates both a plaintiff recruitment pool and a regulatory target, Swiss Re said.
Preparing for Expanded Exposure
For casualty insurers, the convergence of litigation momentum, regulatory tightening, and mounting public awareness signals an emerging long-tail liability exposure with excess inflation dynamics, according to Swiss Re. The reinsurer recommends insurers take immediate action in three areas to manage risk:
First, exposure mapping is essential — identifying which insureds face vulnerability by type and quantifying policy limits and attachment points by policy year. General liability, product liability, and directors and officers policies could all face claims, the report said.
Second, insurers should establish early warning systems monitoring the San Francisco case, amended Martinez pleadings, and plaintiff bar recruitment efforts targeting individuals with type 2 diabetes or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
Third, tracking specific signposts matters: cases that survive initial motions to dismiss, discovery orders, multi-district litigation formation, and regulatory definitions of ultra-processed foods as they emerge. If the FDA or USDA publish a uniform national definition, plaintiffs could anchor claims to a federal standard — a development that would reshape the entire liability landscape.
“If a case survives early motions and reaches discovery, internal documents could drive outsized settlements, with large defense costs. A single win could also trigger multi-jurisdiction follow-on actions and copycat claims,” Swiss Re said.
View more about the report here. &

