What does California's attorney general allege DuPont and its spin-offs did regarding PFAS liability?

California Attorney General Rob Bonta alleges that DuPont and three of its spin-off companies—Chemours, Corteva, and Qnity—engaged in a corporate restructuring scheme to avoid per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) liability and related claims, specifically through a memorandum of understanding (MOU) designed to shift the overwhelming majority of liabilities onto Chemours—the company with the least amount of assets—while limiting the liability of Corteva, New DuPont, and Qnity.

According to the legal filing, which company was designated to bear the majority of PFAS-related liabilities, and why is that significant?

According to the legal filing, Chemours was designated to bear the overwhelming majority of PFAS-related liabilities, and this is significant because Chemours is described as 'the company with the least amount of assets'—a structural arrangement that California alleges was intentionally designed to insulate the more financially robust entities (Corteva, New DuPont, and Qnity) from accountability for PFAS contamination and associated legal claims.

California alleges DuPont used spin-off companies to avoid PFAS liability

Aug 13, 2026

California Attorney General alleges DuPont and its spin-offs restructured to shift PFAS liabilities onto Chemours while limiting exposure for Corteva and New DuPont. The legal filing claims an MOU was designed to evade responsibility for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances claims.

cen

2026-08-13

California alleges DuPont used spin-off companies to avoid PFAS liability

FAQ

Scan to get the App