Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Guarantees and Letters of Credit The Company has various bank guarantees, letters of credit and surety bonds which are used to support its ongoing business operations, satisfy governmental requirements associated with pending litigation in various jurisdictions and the payment of customs duties. As of March 31, 2026, the Company had a total of approximately $241 million of available bank guarantees, commercial guarantees, standby letters of credit and surety bonds with various financial institutions. There was a total of approximately $53 million outstanding under the bank guarantees, standby letters of credit and commercial guarantees as of March 31, 2026. In order to challenge certain assessments in Brazil, the Company has been required to, and has separately pledged assets, principally property, plant and equipment, to cover assessments in the amount of approximately $8 million as of March 31, 2026. Litigation The Company assesses contingencies related to litigation and/or other matters to determine the degree of probability and range of possible loss if reasonably estimable. A loss contingency is accrued in the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because litigation is inherently unpredictable and unfavorable resolutions could occur, assessing contingencies is highly sensitive and requires judgments about future events and any assessments or the related decisions on accruals could be inaccurate. On at least a quarterly basis, the Company reviews contingencies related to litigation to determine the adequacy of accruals. The amount of ultimate loss may substantially differ from these estimates and the amounts accrued, and further events may require the Company to increase or decrease the amounts it has accrued on any matter. Periodically, the Company assesses its insurance coverage for all known claims, where applicable, taking into account aggregate coverage by occurrence, limits of coverage, self-insured retentions and deductibles, historical claims experience and claims experience with its insurance carriers. The probable liabilities are recorded at management’s best estimate of the probable outcome of the lawsuits and claims where reasonably estimable, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the individual matters as well as past experience on similar matters. At each balance sheet date, management assesses whether it is probable that a loss as to asserted or unasserted claims has been incurred and if so, whether the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company records the expected liability with respect to claims in Other current liabilities or Other liabilities and expected recoveries from its insurance carriers in Other current assets or Other assets. The Company recognizes a receivable when it believes that realization of the insurance receivable is probable under the terms of the insurance policies and its payment experience to date. Litigation Matters A motion to approve a securities class action was filed in the Tel Aviv District Court, Israel, in August 2019, alleging, among other things, false and misleading statements largely in connection with IFF’s acquisition of Frutarom and improper payments made by Frutarom businesses operating principally in Russia and Ukraine to representatives of customers. The motion (“Oman”) (following an initial amendment) asserted claims under the Israeli Securities Act-1968 against IFF, its former Chairman and CEO, and its former CFO, and against Frutarom and certain former Frutarom officers and directors, as well as claims under the Israeli Companies Act-1999 against certain former Frutarom officers and directors. On July 14, 2022, the court approved the parties’ motion to mediate the dispute, which postponed all case deadlines until after the mediation. The parties held mediation meetings on September 13, 2022, November 22, 2022, March 1, 2023, November 2023, March 3, 2024 and April 1, 2024. In November 2024, the court granted extensions to the parties’ joint filings of the responses to the Oman motion and for the evidential hearings, for the parties to exhaust the mediation proceeding. In the second quarter of 2025, the parties finalized a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval. The settlement, approved by the court in November 2025, resolves all claims against Frutarom and its former officers and directors, and was made to avoid the cost, distraction and uncertainty of prolonged litigation. The settlement agreement states the settlement payment, fees and expenses totaling 24 million New Israel Shekel (approximately $7 million) will be paid by the respondents’ insurers. On October 29, 2019, IFF and Frutarom filed a claim in the Tel Aviv District Court, Israel, against Ori Yehudai, the former President and CEO of Frutarom, and against certain former directors of Frutarom, challenging the bonus of $20 million granted to Yehudai in 2018. IFF and Frutarom allege, among other things, that Yehudai was not entitled to receive the bonus because he breached his fiduciary duty by, among other things, knowing of the above-mentioned improper payments and failing to prevent them from being made. The parties agreed, pursuant to the court’s recommendation, to attempt to resolve the dispute through mediation, and a court decision is pending with regard to the order in which this claim and the class action described below will be heard. On March 11, 2020, an IFF shareholder filed a motion to approve a class action in Israel against, among others, Frutarom, Yehudai, and Frutarom’s former board of directors, alleging that former minority shareholders of Frutarom were harmed as a result of the US $20 million bonus paid to Yehudai. The court held an evidentiary hearing on the motion to approve a class action in March 2024. In September 2025, the court issued a decision granting the motion to certify a class action. In December 2025, Frutarom submitted its motion for rehearing of that decision. Since March 2023, various putative class action lawsuits have been filed against IFF, Firmenich International SA, Givaudan SA, and Symrise AG and/or certain affiliates thereof in the Quebec Superior Court, the Federal Court of Canada, Ontario Superior Court, the Supreme Court of British Columbia and, in several cases, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. These actions allege violations of the Canadian Competition Act and the Sherman Act, as applicable, and other related claims, and seek damages and other relief. IFF announced on October 17, 2025, that it entered into a settlement agreement which will be a full settlement of the multiple civil class actions brought by direct purchasers of fragrance products in the United States. On November 17, 2025, the Court granted the motion for preliminary approval of this settlement and IFF then contributed $26 million to a settlement fund to resolve all class claims related to this direct purchaser class. Motions for preliminary approval have been filed by the plaintiffs for each of the settlements. On April 6, 2026 and on March 16, 2026, IFF entered into respective settlement agreements with the indirect purchaser plaintiffs and the end-user plaintiffs. During the twelve months ended December 31, 2025, the Company recognized a total provision of $43 million within “Selling and Administrative Expenses” in connection with the U.S. class action lawsuits, based on estimated potential settlement amount inclusive of the $26 million noted above related to settlement with direct purchasers. This provision does not include any potential liabilities that may arise from other civil proceedings not encompassed by the U.S. class action lawsuits. On January 27, 2026, an additional class action complaint was filed in the District of New Jersey on behalf of a class of purchasers in the United States of consumer goods containing fragrance products that were purchased outside the United States. IFF may face additional civil suits, in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, European Union or in other countries, relating to such alleged conduct. At this time, IFF is unable to predict the potential outcome of these lawsuits or any potential effect they may have on the Company’s results of operations, liquidity or financial condition. The resolution of any of these items could have a material adverse effect on IFF’s results of operation, financial condition, and overall business. Investigations On June 3, 2020, the Israel Police’s National Fraud Investigation Unit and the Israeli Securities Authority commenced an investigation into Frutarom and certain of its former executives, based on suspected bribery of foreign officials, money laundering, and violations of the Israeli Securities Act-1968. On February 26, 2024, the Israeli authorities informed Frutarom that the authorities decided to close the criminal investigation. On March 7, 2023, the European Commission (“EC”) and the United Kingdom Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”) carried out unannounced inspections of certain of IFF’s facilities. IFF understands the EC, CMA and the Swiss Competition Commission are investigating potential anticompetitive conduct as it relates to IFF’s fragrance businesses. On the same day, IFF was served with a grand jury subpoena by the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”). The Mexican Competition Commission has also announced that it is investigating potential anticompetitive conduct in the fragrance and fragrance ingredients industries. On February 5, 2026, IFF received a letter from DOJ confirming the closing of its investigation (such decision is independent of the other related civil or regulatory matters). The Company has applied for leniency in a number of jurisdictions. Leniency, if obtained in a jurisdiction, would generally carry significant benefits by, for example, reducing or eliminating monetary liability in that jurisdiction. Since March 7, 2023, other investigations have been underway or threatened in other jurisdictions related to claimed anti-competitive conduct. While these investigations are confidential, the Company is cooperating and/or seeking leniency in those jurisdictions, as well. IFF has been and intends to continue actively cooperating with these investigations, as well as any other present or future inquiries from governmental authorities. During 2026, additional investigations have been initiated in Singapore and India relating to employment practices in the fragrance industry. As with the other investigations, IFF is cooperating with the regulators in these investigations. IFF is currently unable to predict or determine the duration or outcome of the investigations, or whether the outcome of the investigations will materially impact the Company’s results of operations, liquidity or financial condition. An adverse judgment or other outcome or settlement with respect to any proceedings discussed above could result in significant fines or payments by IFF. The resolution of any of these items could have a material adverse effect on IFF’s results of operations, financial condition, and overall business. Environmental Proceedings Effective March 22, 2024, the Solae, LLC Memphis site (“Solae”) signed an Administrative Order on Consent (the “Consent Order”) resolving violations and penalties pertaining to the Administrative Order and Assessment received from the City of Memphis on May 27, 2022 related to alleged wastewater discharge violations. In view of the Consent Order, Solae withdrew its previously filed appeal. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Solae is completing its capital project efforts in accordance with the agreed schedule for attaining compliance with current wastewater permit requirements. This matter is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, cash flows or results of operations. Other Commitments The Company has contingencies involving third parties (such as labor, contract, technology or product-related claims or litigation) as well as government-related items in various jurisdictions in which it operates pertaining to such items as value-added taxes, other indirect taxes, customs and duties and sales and use taxes. It is possible that cash flows or results of operations, in any period, could be materially affected by the unfavorable resolution of one or more of these contingencies. The most significant government-related contingencies exist in Brazil. With regard to the Brazilian matters, the Company believes it has valid defenses for the underlying positions under dispute; however, in order to pursue these defenses, the Company is required to, and has provided, bank guarantees and pledged assets in the aggregate amount of approximately $19 million. The Brazilian matters take an extended period of time to proceed through the judicial process and there are a limited number of rulings to date. Other The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and have not been fully resolved. Due to the inherent subjectivity and unpredictability of outcomes of legal proceedings, the Company is unable to determine, with certainty, the probability of the outcome of these matters or the range of reasonably possible losses, if any. Other Matters On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) does not authorize the imposition of tariffs, effectively invalidating IEEPA‑based tariffs that had been in effect since February 2025. On April 20, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) launched an online portal that may be used to submit requests for refunds of IEEPA tariffs previously assessed. All refund requests are subject to CBP review and approval prior to the issuance of any refunds. As of March 31, 2026, the Company has not recognized an asset related to potential tariff refunds, as significant uncertainty remains regarding the review process, timing, and amount of any refunds that may ultimately be approved. In addition, to the extent refunds are received, the Company may be required, based on the contractual terms with certain customers, to pass some or all of such amounts through to its customers. Accordingly, the ultimate amount, if any, that the Company may retain is uncertain. The Company will continue to evaluate new information and will recognize any refund and related obligations when the recognition criteria under ASC 450, Contingencies, have been met.

range of possible loss if reasonably estimable. A loss contingency is accrued in the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because litigation is inherently unpredictable and unfavorable resolutions could occur, assessing contingencies is highly sensitive and requires judgments about future events and any assessments or the related decisions on accruals could be inaccurate. On at least a quarterly basis, the Company reviews contingencies related to litigation to determine the adequacy of accruals. The amount of ultimate loss may substantially differ from these estimates and the amounts accrued, and further events may require the Company to increase or decrease the amounts it has accrued on any matter.

Periodically, the Company assesses its insurance coverage for all known claims, where applicable, taking into account aggregate coverage by occurrence, limits of coverage, self-insured retentions and deductibles, historical claims experience and claims experience with its insurance carriers. The probable liabilities are recorded at management’s best estimate of the probable outcome of the lawsuits and claims where reasonably estimable, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the individual matters as well as past experience on similar matters. At each balance sheet date, management assesses whether it is probable that a loss as to asserted or unasserted claims has been incurred and if so, whether the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company records the expected liability with respect to claims in Other current liabilities or Other liabilities and expected recoveries from its insurance carriers in Other current assets or Other assets. The Company recognizes a receivable when it believes that realization of the insurance receivable is probable under the terms of the insurance policies and its payment experience to date.

A motion to approve a securities class action was filed in the Tel Aviv District Court, Israel, in August 2019, alleging, among other things, false and misleading statements largely in connection with IFF’s acquisition of Frutarom and improper payments made by Frutarom businesses operating principally in Russia and Ukraine to representatives of customers. The motion (“Oman”) (following an initial amendment) asserted claims under the Israeli Securities Act-1968 against IFF, its former Chairman and CEO, and its former CFO, and against Frutarom and certain former Frutarom officers and directors, as well as claims under the Israeli Companies Act-1999 against certain former Frutarom officers and directors. On July 14, 2022, the court approved the parties’ motion to mediate the dispute, which postponed all case deadlines until after the mediation. The parties held mediation meetings on September 13, 2022, November 22, 2022, March 1, 2023, November 2023, March 3, 2024 and April 1, 2024. In November 2024, the court granted extensions to the parties’ joint filings of the responses to the Oman motion and for the evidential hearings, for the parties to exhaust the mediation proceeding. In the second quarter of 2025, the parties finalized a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval. The settlement, approved by the court in November 2025, resolves all claims against Frutarom and its former officers and directors, and was made to avoid the cost, distraction and uncertainty of prolonged litigation. The settlement agreement states the settlement payment, fees and expenses totaling 24 million New Israel Shekel (approximately $7 million) will be paid by the respondents’ insurers.

On October 29, 2019, IFF and Frutarom filed a claim in the Tel Aviv District Court, Israel, against Ori Yehudai, the former President and CEO of Frutarom, and against certain former directors of Frutarom, challenging the bonus of $20 million granted to Yehudai in 2018. IFF and Frutarom allege, among other things, that Yehudai was not entitled to receive the bonus because he breached his fiduciary duty by, among other things, knowing of the above-mentioned improper payments and failing to prevent them from being made. The parties agreed, pursuant to the court’s recommendation, to attempt to resolve the dispute through mediation, and a court decision is pending with regard to the order in which this claim and the class action described below will be heard.

On March 11, 2020, an IFF shareholder filed a motion to approve a class action in Israel against, among others, Frutarom, Yehudai, and Frutarom’s former board of directors, alleging that former minority shareholders of Frutarom were harmed as a result of the US $20 million bonus paid to Yehudai. The court held an evidentiary hearing on the motion to approve a class action in March 2024. In September 2025, the court issued a decision granting the motion to certify a class action. In December 2025, Frutarom submitted its motion for rehearing of that decision.

Since March 2023, various putative class action lawsuits have been filed against IFF, Firmenich International SA, Givaudan SA, and Symrise AG and/or certain affiliates thereof in the Quebec Superior Court, the Federal Court of Canada, Ontario Superior Court, the Supreme Court of British Columbia and, in several cases, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. These actions allege violations of the Canadian Competition Act and the Sherman Act, as applicable, and other related claims, and seek damages and other relief. IFF announced on October 17, 2025, that it entered into a settlement agreement which will be a full settlement of the multiple civil class actions brought by direct purchasers of fragrance products in the United States. On November 17, 2025, the Court granted the motion for preliminary approval of this settlement and IFF then contributed $26 million to a settlement fund to resolve all class claims related to this direct purchaser class. Motions for preliminary approval have been filed by the plaintiffs for each of the settlements. On April 6, 2026 and on March 16, 2026, IFF entered into respective settlement agreements with the indirect purchaser plaintiffs and the end-user plaintiffs. During the twelve months ended December 31, 2025, the Company recognized a total provision of $43 million within “Selling and Administrative Expenses” in connection with the U.S. class action lawsuits, based on estimated potential settlement amount inclusive of the $26 million noted above related to settlement with direct purchasers. This provision does not include any potential liabilities that may arise from other civil proceedings not encompassed by the U.S. class action lawsuits. On January 27, 2026, an additional class action complaint was filed in the District of New Jersey on behalf of a class of purchasers in the United States of consumer goods containing fragrance products that were purchased outside the United States. IFF may face additional civil suits, in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, European Union or in other countries, relating to such alleged conduct. At this time, IFF is unable to predict the potential outcome of these lawsuits or any potential effect they may have on the Company’s results of operations, liquidity or financial condition. The resolution of any of these items could have a material adverse effect on IFF’s results of operation, financial condition, and overall business.

On March 7, 2023, the European Commission (“EC”) and the United Kingdom Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”) carried out unannounced inspections of certain of IFF’s facilities. IFF understands the EC, CMA and the Swiss Competition Commission are investigating potential anticompetitive conduct as it relates to IFF’s fragrance businesses. On the same day, IFF was served with a grand jury subpoena by the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”). The Mexican Competition Commission has also announced that it is investigating potential anticompetitive conduct in the fragrance and fragrance ingredients industries. On February 5, 2026, IFF received a letter from DOJ confirming the closing of its investigation (such decision is independent of the other related civil or regulatory matters). The Company has applied for leniency in a number of jurisdictions. Leniency, if obtained in a jurisdiction, would generally carry significant benefits by, for example, reducing or eliminating monetary liability in that jurisdiction. Since March 7, 2023, other investigations have been underway or threatened in other jurisdictions related to claimed anti-competitive conduct. While these investigations are confidential, the Company is cooperating and/or seeking leniency in those jurisdictions, as well. IFF has been and intends to continue actively cooperating with these investigations, as well as any other present or future inquiries from governmental authorities.

IFF is currently unable to predict or determine the duration or outcome of the investigations, or whether the outcome of the investigations will materially impact the Company’s results of operations, liquidity or financial condition. An adverse judgment or other outcome or settlement with respect to any proceedings discussed above could result in significant fines or payments by IFF. The resolution of any of these items could have a material adverse effect on IFF’s results of operations, financial condition, and overall business.

Effective March 22, 2024, the Solae, LLC Memphis site (“Solae”) signed an Administrative Order on Consent (the “Consent Order”) resolving violations and penalties pertaining to the Administrative Order and Assessment received from the City of Memphis on May 27, 2022 related to alleged wastewater discharge violations. In view of the Consent Order, Solae withdrew its previously filed appeal. Pursuant to the Consent Order, Solae is completing its capital project efforts in accordance with the agreed schedule for attaining compliance with current wastewater permit requirements. This matter is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, cash flows or results of operations.

The Company has contingencies involving third parties (such as labor, contract, technology or product-related claims or litigation) as well as government-related items in various jurisdictions in which it operates pertaining to such items as value-added taxes, other indirect taxes, customs and duties and sales and use taxes. It is possible that cash flows or results of operations, in any period, could be materially affected by the unfavorable resolution of one or more of these contingencies.

The most significant government-related contingencies exist in Brazil. With regard to the Brazilian matters, the Company believes it has valid defenses for the underlying positions under dispute; however, in order to pursue these defenses, the Company is required to, and has provided, bank guarantees and pledged assets in the aggregate amount of approximately $19 million. The Brazilian matters take an extended period of time to proceed through the judicial process and there are a limited number of rulings to date.

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) does not authorize the imposition of tariffs, effectively invalidating IEEPA‑based tariffs that had been in effect since February 2025. On April 20, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) launched an online portal that may be used to submit requests for refunds of IEEPA tariffs previously assessed. All refund requests are subject to CBP review and approval prior to the issuance of any refunds.

As of March 31, 2026, the Company has not recognized an asset related to potential tariff refunds, as significant uncertainty remains regarding the review process, timing, and amount of any refunds that may ultimately be approved. In addition, to the extent refunds are received, the Company may be required, based on the contractual terms with certain customers, to pass some or all of such amounts through to its customers. Accordingly, the ultimate amount, if any, that the Company may retain is uncertain. The Company will continue to evaluate new information and will recognize any refund and related obligations when the recognition criteria under ASC 450, Contingencies, have been met.