+34
Two California law firms have filed a class-action lawsuit accusing Aldi of improperly layering delivery, expedited fulfillment and convenience fees onto online grocery orders paid with SNAP benefits. The plaintiffs argue that the charges disproportionately burden low-income shoppers, while Aldi maintains that SNAP benefits cannot be used for fees or non-eligible items. The case is early stage, and Aldi has not commented.
Get a browser notification when a story in your categories carries a High or Critical risk / opportunity signal. Max 5 alerts a day. Two California law firms allege Aldi illegally layers delivery, expedited and convenience fees onto online grocery orders paid with SNAP benefits, raising fresh legal questions for retailers expanding EBT delivery.
The suit claims these added service fees, which Aldi says cover nonfood items and are not SNAP-eligible, disproportionately burden low-income shoppers who rely on federal food assistance. The case lands as more retailers and delivery platforms, including DoorDash with Dollar Tree and Dollar General, expand SNAP payment options for onlineA class-action lawsuit filed in California Superior Court accuses Aldi of charging delivery, expedited fulfillment and convenience fees to customers who pay for online grocery orders with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits.
The two California law firms behind the suit — James Hawkins APLC and The Markham Law Firm — argue that these added charges illegally burden low-income shoppers who rely on federal food assistance, according to a Law360 report. Neither the firms nor Aldi responded to requests for comment. The mechanics of the dispute center on how SNAP payments work online. SNAP benefits are loaded onto Electronic Benefit Transfer cards, and by law they can only cover eligible food items.
Aldi's own website states that customers cannot use EBT cards to pay for non-SNAP-eligible products, tips, delivery fees, ordering fees or convenience fees; those must be paid with a credit card, debit card or another method. The plaintiffs allege that layering these fees onto SNAP orders effectively penalizes the shoppers the program is designed to help. The lawsuit arrives as grocery delivery and SNAP acceptance converge.
Aldi began accepting SNAP payments for Instacart delivery orders in November 2020, when pandemic-driven demand for home delivery surged, though it has long accepted SNAP in its physical stores. More recently, DoorDash expanded SNAP payment availability for online ordering at all SNAP-eligible Dollar Tree locations in June, following a similar rollout with Dollar General last year. That widening adoption makes the legal questions raised in this case relevant well beyond Aldi.
Aldi illegally charges delivery, expedited fulfillment and convenience fees to customers using SNAP benefits online, and these fees improperly impact low-income shoppers. SNAP EBT cards cannot be used to pay for non-SNAP-eligible items, tips, delivery fees, ordering fees or convenience fees; customers must use another payment method for those charges. To comply with SNAP rules by separating eligible food purchases from ineligible service fees, while still offering delivery as a paid convenience.
Why the Fee Structure Is Legally Exposed The core tension is between two legitimate positions. SNAP rules prohibit using federal benefits for delivery, tips or convenience fees, so retailers must separate eligible food costs from service charges. Aldi says it does exactly that, requiring a second payment method for fees. The plaintiffs, however, argue that the practical result is a surcharge on SNAP users — a group with limited payment flexibility — and that this improperly impacts low-income shoppers.
The case will likely turn on whether the fee design effectively discriminates against SNAP recipients or merely reflects standard e-commerce cost recovery. Last year Instacart agreed to pay $60 million in refunds to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it promoted free delivery but charged a service fee that could add as much as 15% to an order. Instacart denied wrongdoing.
That settlement did not establish liability, but it signaled regulatory and legal scrutiny of how delivery platforms disclose and structure fees. Aldi's alleged use of Instacart and Aldi Express as delivery channels means the case could pull in platform-level practices as well as the retailer's own fee policies. The lawsuit lands as more retailers and delivery firms accept SNAP for online orders.
DoorDash's June expansion to all SNAP-eligible Dollar Tree locations, following its Dollar General partnership, shows how quickly EBT delivery is becoming mainstream. For context, any legal ruling that restricts how delivery fees can be applied to SNAP orders would ripple across grocers, gig-delivery platforms and their payment partners, forcing changes to checkout flows, fee disclosure and possibly pricing models.
Retailers that have recently expanded SNAP delivery — or plan to — now face a clearer incentive to audit their fee architecture before similar suits arrive. Aldi has not commented, and the suit is at an early stage. But class-action status, if granted, could expose the grocer to refunds and damages across a broad California customer base, plus reputational risk with value-focused shoppers who are central to its brand.
The company's discount positioning makes any perception of penalizing low-income customers particularly sensitive. The medium-term risk is less about a single payout and more about whether fee structures for SNAP delivery become a compliance standard that all grocers must meet. The most important insight: this case tests whether charging standard delivery and convenience fees on SNAP orders is lawful, and the outcome will set the compliance bar for every grocer and delivery platform now expanding EBT online ordering.
Confirm that EBT cards are never charged for delivery, expedited, convenience or ordering fees, and that the second-payment-method step is clear and unavoidable before order confirmation. Aldi's own website language shows the policy exists — the dispute is about how it works in practice. The Instacart FTC settlement over a service fee adding up to 15% to orders shows that platform-level fee presentation carries legal risk.
Retailers using Instacart, DoorDash or proprietary apps should verify that all fees are itemized and disclosed before a SNAP customer pays. If the court grants class-action status, the case becomes a template for similar suits in other states and raises the cost of non-compliance across the sector.
As DoorDash expands SNAP payments to Dollar Tree and Dollar General locations, expect regulators and plaintiffs' firms to treat SNAP delivery fees as a uniform compliance issue rather than a company-specific one.the court's ruling on class certification; any motion to dismiss and Aldi's response; whether other grocers or delivery platforms are named in follow-on suits; and any FTC or USDA guidance on SNAP delivery fee practices. A class-action covering California SNAP customers could force refunds and fee-structure changes, and any ruling against Aldi would raise compliance costs for its online delivery business.
The suit does not directly alter Aldi's market position versus rivals, though competitors expanding SNAP delivery face the same legal questions. SNAP is federally regulated and the case could prompt USDA or FTC scrutiny of how delivery fees are applied to EBT orders across the grocery sector. There is no clear upside for Aldi; the opportunity lies with competitors or platforms that can demonstrate cleaner SNAP fee compliance.
Scratch the next story
Aldi SNAP Benefits Online Grocery Delivery Delivery Fees Class-Action Lawsuit
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News: You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Kemi Badenoch Warns Tories to Prepare for Snap Election in MayKemi Badenoch warns Tories to prepare for a snap election in May, despite Andy Burnham's efforts to dismiss rumours. She cites his post-election policies as evidence.
Read more »
Spain’s Sánchez weighs calling snap election after housing vote defeatThe prime minister could seize on the parliamentary defeat to campaign on housing, an issue that has fueled protests across the country.
Read more »
Major SNAP changes: How CalFresh benefits are changing in CaliforniaMajor SNAP changes will bring modest benefit increases to California households while shifting hundreds of millions in administrative costs to state taxpayers.
Read more »
Farm Bill Stalls as SNAP Cost-Share Impasse Leaves Three WeeksSenate Agriculture Committee leaders are racing to pass a farm bill before the new Congress in January, but a partisan impasse over SNAP cost-sharing threatens to derail efforts.
Read more »