San Diego, Feb 3, 2026, 08:40 (PST)
- Costco confirmed it has taken down “no preservatives” claims from signs and online listings for its rotisserie chicken
- Two consumers from California claim the chicken includes sodium phosphate and carrageenan, which they say serve as preservatives
- The lawsuit aims to secure class-action status for buyers across the U.S., with a specific subclass designated for those in California
Costco Wholesale Corp. has taken down “no preservatives” labels from signs and online listings for its Kirkland rotisserie chicken following a proposed class action by two California consumers alleging the claim was deceptive. The company told MEAT+POULTRY it “removed statements concerning preservatives” to maintain consistent labeling. It added that ingredients like carrageenan and sodium phosphate, which aid moisture retention and texture, are approved by food safety regulators. Wesley M. Griffith, the plaintiffs’ attorney, said Costco’s quick removal of the wording confirms the “no preservative” claims were inaccurate. (Meatpoultry)
The clash centers on a popular prepared-food item, hitting retailers and food producers as regulators zero in on straightforward ingredient claims that influence buyers right at checkout. Costco shares gained roughly 1.6% in Tuesday’s morning session.
The complaint, filed Jan. 22 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, aims to represent a nationwide class of U.S. buyers along with a California-specific subclass, according to court documents. It identifies plaintiffs Bianca Johnston and Anatasia Chernov, who say they purchased the rotisserie chicken after encountering “no preservatives” claims both in-store and online, including at a Victorville, California location in December 2024 and a San Marcos, California store in February 2025.
Sodium phosphate and carrageenan frequently appear as food additives; the lawsuit claims they act as preservatives, but Costco insists they’re there to improve moisture and texture. The rotisserie chicken goes for less than $5, and some retail analysts label it a “loss leader” — priced low or even at a loss to lure customers inside. (Los Angeles Times)
U.S. food-labeling regulations define a “chemical preservative” as any chemical added to food that “tends to prevent or retard deterioration.” This definition often sparks debates over whether an ingredient qualifies as a preservative or simply serves as a texture or processing aid. (Ecfr)
A class action lawsuit represents a larger group of people with similar claims, potentially increasing the financial risks if a judge allows it to move forward. The plaintiffs highlight “clean label” marketing — an industry buzzword for foods marketed as free from certain additives — as a key selling point Costco relied on.
Warehouse retailers like Sam’s Club and BJ’s Wholesale Club battle fiercely over ready-to-eat food and private-label trust. Here, quick claims on signs often carry as much weight as the detailed print on packaging.
But proposed consumer class actions frequently hit roadblocks right away. Costco may move to dismiss the suit or limit its scope, leaving the judge to determine if shoppers would realistically interpret “no preservatives” as the plaintiffs allege.
Removing a sign doesn’t necessarily close the case. Plaintiffs may still pursue damages for previous purchases if they convince the court the marketing was misleading. Costco hasn’t indicated any intention to alter the product’s ingredients.
