The list of distributors identified as alleged co-conspirators in the sprawling PVC pipe price-fixing case has doubled to six, while settlements tied to the litigation have now topped $415 million.

An amended complaint filed in 2025 by non-converter seller purchasers identifies Hajoca Corp., Porter Pipe & Supply and United Pipe & Steel as alleged co-conspirators, joining Core & Main, Ferguson and Fortiline Waterworks, which were named in earlier filings.

None of the six distributors is named as a defendant in the litigation.

The complaint alleges the distributors facilitated or participated in a broader conspiracy among PVC pipe and fittings manufacturers to fix, raise, maintain and stabilize prices. The allegations remain unproven.

When MDM first reported on the case in December 2024, the litigation identified Core & Main, Ferguson and Reece-owned Fortiline as alleged co-conspirators. At the time, the case had also drawn a U.S. Department of Justice antitrust investigation after Otter Tail Corp. disclosed receiving a federal grand jury subpoena seeking documents concerning PVC pipe manufacturing, selling and pricing.

The addition of three more distributors is one of several major developments since then.

Settlements Surpass $415M

Four PVC pipe manufacturer groups have now agreed to approximately $409.4 million in settlements across multiple purchaser classes, according to court filings and company disclosures reviewed by MDM.

Including previously announced settlements totaling $6 million with pricing information provider Oil Price Information Service, or OPIS, brings the civil settlement value to approximately $415.4 million.

• Atkore has agreed to pay a combined $186.5 million across three purchaser groups — $72.5 million to direct purchasers, $64 million to non-converter seller purchasers and $50 million to end users.
• Otter Tail subsidiaries Northern Pipe Products and Vinyltech Corp. have agreed to combined settlements totaling $103.5 million, including $39.5 million for direct purchasers, $34 million for non-converter sellers and $30 million for end users.
• Westlake Corp. agreed to pay $67 million to resolve claims from direct purchasers. Its indirect-purchaser litigation remains pending.
• Most recently, Pipelife Jet Stream, a U.S. subsidiary of Austria-based Wienerberger, reached agreements across the three plaintiff classes totaling approximately $52.4 million.

The settlements generally do not constitute admissions of wrongdoing, and several remain subject to final court approval. They also include cooperation provisions that could aid plaintiffs as they continue pursuing claims against manufacturers that have not settled.

The wave of agreements follows the first settlement MDM reported in June 2025, when OPIS agreed to pay $6 million across the purchaser classes and cooperate with plaintiffs. Those settlements have since received final approval.

Case Continues Against Remaining Defendants

The litigation alleges that leading PVC pipe and fittings manufacturers coordinated pricing beginning around 2020 and shared competitively sensitive information through OPIS’ PVC & Pipe Weekly publication and direct communications.

Manufacturers have disputed the allegations, and the settling companies generally have denied wrongdoing as part of their agreements.

The DOJ investigation also remains unresolved. Recent court and company filings indicate the Justice Department has continued seeking limits on portions of civil discovery while its antitrust investigation proceeds.

Several manufacturer settlements still face final approval hearings this fall, while claims continue against non-settling defendants.

MDM Analysis

For distributors, the biggest development here is no longer simply the mounting manufacturer settlement total. The expansion from three to six distributors identified as alleged co-conspirators significantly broadens the distribution sector’s connection to the case, even though none is currently a defendant. Meanwhile, more than $400 million in manufacturer settlements — many carrying cooperation requirements — could give plaintiffs additional evidence and leverage as litigation continues. 

Watch closely for any further distributor names, attempts to add distributors as defendants, additional manufacturer settlements and, most importantly, whether the ongoing DOJ investigation produces charges, subpoenas or other enforcement action. MDM will continue monitoring the situation.