Unilever Considers Withdrawing Funding from Ben & Jerry’s Foundation Amid Internal Dispute
Unilever is reportedly weighing the possibility of cutting financial ties with the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, as tensions escalate over governance and brand independence, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The conflict stems from a long-standing dispute between Unilever and the board of Ben & Jerry’s, particularly regarding control over the brand’s social activism and political messaging. Unilever currently provides annual funding to the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, an independent nonprofit entity formed by the ice cream brand’s founders. The foundation supports social justice and environmental causes and receives approximately $3 million annually through a mechanism linked to the company’s profits.
Sources suggest Unilever is actively reviewing its legal and financial options to discontinue or restrict these contributions as it seeks to reassert control over its brand strategy. The review comes in the wake of recent controversies surrounding Ben & Jerry’s political stances, which have drawn scrutiny and criticism from investors and consumer advocacy groups alike. Tensions peaked in 2021, when Ben & Jerry’s announced it would stop selling its products in Israeli-occupied territories, a move that sparked backlash and led to legal action.
The governance structure of Ben & Jerry’s has long been unique within the FMCG sector. When Unilever acquired the brand in 2000, it agreed to maintain a degree of operational independence for the ice cream maker’s social mission and board decision-making. However, critics within Unilever’s leadership argue that this arrangement has become increasingly problematic, especially when brand decisions spill over into wider geopolitical controversies that could damage Unilever’s global reputation and shareholder value.
While no final decision has been made, any funding withdrawal from the foundation would signal a broader strategic shift in how Unilever manages purpose-led brands within its portfolio. With consumer demand for ethically driven brands on the rise, resolving the balance between purpose and profitability remains a critical challenge for FMCG giants.
As the sector continues to evaluate the role of corporate activism, the outcome of this internal dispute could prompt wider conversations across the industry about brand autonomy, shareholder accountability, and the limits of corporate social responsibility.