Costco’s $4.99 Chicken Has a Salmonella Problem It Didn’t Tell You About

Two separate class action lawsuits filed in early 2026 put Costco’s most iconic product, the $4.99 Kirkland Signature rotisserie chicken, under federal scrutiny. The first accuses Costco of falsely advertising the chicken as containing “no preservatives.” The second goes further, alleging that Costco knowingly sold chicken from a Nebraska processing plant with chronic salmonella contamination and never told the 157 million people who bought it annually.

Both cases are pending in federal court. Neither has been certified as a class action. No settlement exists and no claim form is currently available. The salmonella case faces a critical dismissal ruling that could determine whether it survives.

Costco Rotisserie Chicken Lawsuit Timeline and Updates

2019 — Lincoln Premium Poultry Opens in Fremont, Nebraska

Costco opened its $450 million Lincoln Premium Poultry plant in Fremont, Nebraska, in 2019. The facility was Costco’s first attempt at vertical integration in poultry: raising, slaughtering, and processing its own chickens entirely in-house. The plant processes more than 100 million chickens annually. It supplies Costco’s $4.99 Kirkland Signature rotisserie chicken and Kirkland-branded raw chicken sold in stores.

Costco’s website describes Lincoln Premium Poultry as a company it owns. The stated mission is quality and sustainability. What began accumulating almost immediately was a USDA failure record that would eventually fuel federal litigation.

2019–2023 — Plant Earns Worst USDA Salmonella Rating 92% of the Time

The USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service tests poultry plants on a rolling basis and assigns Category 1, 2, or 3 ratings. Category 3 is the worst. It means the facility exceeded allowable salmonella contamination thresholds. Under USDA guidelines, up to 9.8% of sampled whole chicken carcasses may test positive for salmonella. For certain chicken parts the limit is 15.4%.

According to Farm Forward’s December 2025 report, the Lincoln Premium Poultry plant received a Category 3 rating in approximately 92% of all reporting periods since it opened. No other plant tied to a single major retailer carries this record. Most large poultry processors sell to hundreds of outlets, diffusing the salmonella exposure risk across many retailers. Costco’s vertical integration concentrates that risk entirely on its own shelves.

September 2023 – July 2025 — Plant Fails Every Monthly Test

Farm Forward’s analysis showed the Fremont plant received a Category 3 rating in 100% of reporting months between September 2023 and July 2025. That is not a bad stretch. That is chronic, uninterrupted failure over nearly two years.

Andrew deCoriolis, director of Farm Forward, told Sentient Media the contamination rates were getting worse, not better. The USDA flagged the problem. It published the data. It rated the plant. And under existing law, it could not force the plant to stop operating or recall the chicken.

April 2025 — USDA Withdraws Proposed Salmonella Rule

In 2024, the USDA proposed a regulatory framework that would have designated certain salmonella strains as adulterants in raw poultry, making it illegal to sell contaminated products. In April 2025, the agency withdrew that proposal. The result was direct: Costco’s plant could continue shipping chicken that exceeded contamination standards, and the USDA had no authority to stop it.

That regulatory gap is central to the salmonella lawsuit. The plaintiff argues Costco took advantage of the USDA’s powerlessness to keep prices low and avoid disclosure.

October 2025 — Consumer Reports Names Plant Among Most Contaminated in the U.S.

Consumer Reports published findings in October 2025 naming the Lincoln Premium Poultry plant in Fremont as one of the most contaminated poultry facilities in the country, based on USDA FSIS data collected through July 26, 2025.

The coverage hit nationally. It connected Costco’s famous $4.99 chicken to plant conditions that federal inspectors had been documenting for years. Public awareness of the contamination problem began to accelerate.

December 2025 — Farm Forward Publishes Full Investigation

Animal welfare nonprofit Farm Forward released a detailed report in December 2025 titled “Inside Costco’s Chicken Supply Chain: Salmonella Contamination and the True Costs of the $4.99 Rotisserie Chicken.” The report drew on USDA inspection records and connected the contamination pattern to structural conditions at the plant: overcrowded and poorly ventilated barns, birds bred to grow unnaturally fast, and stressful transport handling. Those conditions, Farm Forward argued, weaken birds’ immune systems and create a breeding ground for pathogens.

The report provided the evidentiary backbone for the class action lawsuit filed two months later.

January 22, 2026 — Preservatives Class Action Filed in San Diego

Bianca Johnston of Big Bear and Anastasia Chernov of Escondido filed a class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, Case No. 3:26-cv-00403. The lawsuit alleged Costco falsely advertised its Kirkland Signature Seasoned Rotisserie Chicken as containing “no preservatives” when the product contained two preservative-functioning additives: sodium phosphate and carrageenan.

The complaint documented “no preservatives” signage in Costco stores and on its website. The plaintiffs argued they would not have purchased the chicken, or would have paid less, had they known the actual ingredients. Legal claims included violations of California and Washington consumer protection laws, the federal Lanham Act, and unjust enrichment.

January 28, 2026 — Costco Removes “No Preservatives” Signage

Costco issued a statement: the company had removed all references to preservatives from its warehouse signs and online product listings “to maintain consistency” with the labeling on the chicken packaging itself. Costco said it uses carrageenan and sodium phosphate to support moisture retention, texture, and product consistency during cooking, and that both ingredients are approved by food safety authorities.

The company did not admit wrongdoing. It did not concede that its prior signage was false. Removing the signs while the lawsuit is pending is a practical response. Whether it neutralizes the legal claims depends on what the court finds about the materiality of the original representations to consumer purchasing decisions.

February 12, 2026 — Salmonella Class Action Filed in Seattle

Lisa Taylor of Affton, Missouri, filed a proposed class action in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, Case No. 2:26-cv-00528. Taylor alleged Costco knowingly sold chicken contaminated with salmonella and failed to disclose the contamination risk to consumers.

Taylor said she purchased one or two Costco rotisserie chickens per month in the St. Louis area and believed she overpaid because Costco marketed the product as top-quality and wholesome while concealing its plant’s failure record. She sought compensatory damages, treble damages of up to $25,000 per person, injunctive relief, and disgorgement. The proposed class covers all U.S. consumers who purchased Kirkland Signature rotisserie chicken or raw chicken from Costco since January 1, 2019.

Plaintiff’s counsel: Kaleigh N. Boyd of Tousley Brain Stephens PLLC and Steven A. Schwartz, Beena M. McDonald, and Dylan D. Altland of Chimicles Schwartz Kriner and Donaldson-Smith LLP.

April 2026 — Costco Moves to Dismiss the Salmonella Case

Costco filed a motion to dismiss the salmonella class action. Its arguments were pointed. The company contended the claims were speculative because properly cooked chicken eliminates salmonella risk and the plaintiff never alleged her specific product made her sick. Costco also argued the “USDA Grade A” label on the chicken reflects physical quality standards, not pathogen levels, and therefore created no false impression about food safety.

The company went further: Taylor herself had described the $4.99 price as “impossibly low” compared to competitors. Costco argued that characterization undercut her economic harm theory because it acknowledged the price reflected something other than a premium safety promise. The motion asks the court to dismiss the case with prejudice, meaning it could not be refiled.

The Two Lawsuits Explained

Lawsuit 1: The “No Preservatives” Case

The preservatives complaint centers on a straightforward false advertising theory. Costco prominently advertised the chicken as containing “no preservatives, MSG, gluten, artificial flavors, or colors.” That language appeared on in-store signs and on the company’s website.

The product contained sodium phosphate and carrageenan. The lawsuit argued both function as preservatives. Sodium phosphate buffers pH, chelates metal ions, and reduces fat oxidation, all of which inhibit microbial growth. Carrageenan is used to preserve food texture and extend shelf life. The complaint argued these functions bring both ingredients squarely within any reasonable consumer’s understanding of “preservative.”

Costco’s defense was implicit in its statement: it characterizes the ingredients as texture and moisture agents, not preservatives. Whether courts accept that characterization is the central legal question. Costco’s decision to remove the signage suggests it recognized the vulnerability of the original claim.

Lawsuit 2: The Salmonella Concealment Case

The salmonella case is more aggressive and legally harder. Taylor is not alleging she got sick. She is alleging she overpaid. Her theory: Costco sold chicken it knew came from a chronically contaminated plant, marketed it as safe and wholesome, and charged a premium it would not have been able to sustain if consumers knew the actual contamination record.

The legal claims are violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and unjust enrichment. The implied warranty claim is significant. It argues that any food product sold for consumption carries an implicit promise that it is safe to eat. Chronic, documented salmonella contamination breaches that warranty, the lawsuit argues, even if no specific consumer was harmed.

Costco’s motion to dismiss counters that cooking eliminates salmonella and no individual plaintiff was injured. That argument addresses personal injury but sidesteps the economic overpayment theory. Courts in consumer protection cases have allowed economic harm claims to proceed even without physical injury. Whether this court agrees will determine whether the case survives.

What the USDA Data Actually Shows

Understanding the USDA’s Category 3 rating requires understanding what it does and does not mean. A Category 3 rating means the plant exceeded the allowable salmonella positivity rate during the testing period. It does not mean every chicken is contaminated. It does not trigger a mandatory recall. The USDA cannot shut down a plant on this basis alone.

The Lincoln Premium Poultry plant received Category 3 ratings in 92% of reporting periods since 2019. The most recent FSIS report covering December 2024 through November 2025 showed improvement to Category 2 in both carcass and parts categories. That shift matters for the ongoing litigation. Costco will argue conditions have improved. Plaintiffs will argue the improvement does not erase seven years of prior contamination or the purchases made during that period.

What the data shows conclusively is that the plant operated below federal food safety benchmarks for most of its existence, that Costco owned and operated the plant, and that Costco marketed the product as top-quality throughout the entire period.

Why Costco Keeps the Price at $4.99

The $4.99 price is not an accident and it is not a profit center. Costco loses money on every rotisserie chicken it sells. The product is a loss-leader, a product sold below cost to drive foot traffic through warehouse doors. Members who stop for a cheap chicken tend to fill their carts with everything else.

The salmonella lawsuit argues this pricing model created a conflict of interest. Fixing the contamination problem at the Nebraska plant would require investment in better animal husbandry, slower bird growth rates, improved ventilation, and cleaner processing conditions. All of that costs money. The lawsuit alleges Costco chose to absorb the contamination risk rather than fix it, because fixing it would undermine the $4.99 price point that drives the whole membership model.

That framing is legally potent if it can be proven. It converts a food safety failure into a knowing commercial deception: Costco knew, could have fixed it, and chose profit over disclosure.

Who Qualifies for Each Lawsuit

For the preservatives case, potential class members are consumers who purchased Kirkland Signature Seasoned Rotisserie Chicken from any Costco location based on in-store or online “no preservatives” representations. The complaint was filed January 22, 2026, and the class period and geographic scope are still being defined through litigation.

For the salmonella case, the proposed class covers all U.S. persons who purchased, for personal or household use, any Kirkland Signature branded rotisserie chicken or raw chicken product sold by Costco since January 1, 2019. That is a sweeping proposed class. Costco sold over 157 million rotisserie chickens in 2025 alone. If the case is certified, the class would be among the largest in recent consumer protection litigation history.

No settlement exists in either case. No claim form is currently available. Consumers cannot file a claim at this time.

What Costco Has Said

On the preservatives case, Costco issued a statement that it removed “no preservatives” signage to maintain consistency with packaging labels and described sodium phosphate and carrageenan as functional cooking ingredients approved by food safety authorities. The company did not admit the prior signage was false.

On the salmonella case, Costco has not issued a public statement addressing the allegations directly. Its court filing argues the claims are speculative, that the USDA Grade A label does not address pathogen levels, and that cooking eliminates the relevant risk. The company is seeking dismissal with prejudice before the case can proceed further.

What This Lawsuit Teaches Consumers

The Costco rotisserie chicken cases expose something the food industry has long understood and consumers rarely consider: food safety data is public, but no one is required to show it to you at the point of sale. The USDA has been publishing Lincoln Premium Poultry’s Category 3 ratings since 2019. That information was always available. Costco never mentioned it.

The “no preservatives” case makes the same point from a labeling angle. Clean-label marketing, the use of terms like “no preservatives,” “natural,” or “no artificial ingredients,” has become a powerful sales tool. It commands consumer attention and, arguably, purchasing decisions. The legal question is whether companies that use those claims have an obligation to be accurate about them. Costco’s quick removal of the signage after the lawsuit filed suggests it understood the claim was difficult to defend.

Together, the two cases illustrate what happens when a product becomes so culturally dominant that its marketing stops being scrutinized. The $4.99 chicken is not just a product. It is a Costco institution. Institutions, as other landmark consumer litigation has demonstrated, are not immune from accountability when their practices diverge from their advertising.

The deeper lesson is structural. Vertical integration gives Costco control and cost advantages that independent processors cannot match. It also gives Costco direct ownership of any safety problems that develop downstream. When a company controls its entire supply chain and then markets the result as top-quality, the legal expectation that it disclosed known quality defects becomes significantly harder to escape.

These cases are early. They may be dismissed. They may settle quietly. But the contamination record is public, the marketing claims are documented, and the class of potential plaintiffs numbers in the hundreds of millions. That combination rarely stays quiet for long.