BASF Wants Evonik. The Last Time Evonik Bought a Peroxide Maker, the FTC Sued

On Friday 25 September 2026 BASF confirmed that it was in exploratory talks with Evonik Industries and RAG-Stiftung, the foundation that is Evonik’s largest shareholder, about a possible takeover of Evonik. BASF said the course and outcome of the discussions remain open. Evonik said it had received a nonbinding approach about a possible voluntary public offer for all its shares, that no talks were currently taking place, and that it would not comment further. Three days later the Financial Times, then Reuters, reported that Evonik had turned the approach down as too low.

Most coverage has treated this as a story about German specialty chemicals, which it is. It is also a hydrogen peroxide story. Evonik is one of the largest peroxide makers in the world, and the last time it bought a peroxide producer, the US Federal Trade Commission went to court to stop it. The FTC lost, but its complaint is still the clearest public description of how the North American peroxide market works, and almost all of it comes down to one physical fact: hydrogen peroxide is sold dissolved in water, and water is heavy.

This is a market-structure piece written for buyers. It reports what the companies have said and what has been reported, and it takes no view on whether the deal should happen or what it would be worth. It forecasts no price. Every fact comes from a company statement, a published report or a US government filing, all listed at the end.

What has actually happened

Very little is settled. Here is the sequence as the companies and the reporting describe it. Where reports differ, the table says so.

The deciding vote is likely to belong to RAG-Stiftung. Reports put its stake at about 43% or about 44% of Evonik. No full takeover can happen without it. The same foundation was a named respondent in the FTC case below, as Evonik’s owner, which is one reason that case is worth rereading now. No offer has been made, no price has been agreed, and none of the reporting describes any plan for Evonik’s peroxide business specifically.

How much hydrogen peroxide Evonik makes

Evonik’s Active Oxygens business describes itself as “one of the largest producers of hydrogen peroxide globally,” with “an annual global capacity totaling more than one million metric tons per year.” Its site list names eighteen production locations. Five of them make hydrogen peroxide in North America, and three of the five were Evonik’s before 2020. The other two came with PeroxyChem.

The same list also names peracetic acid and persulfate sites, which this article leaves aside. The point of the table is geographic. The plants are spread from Alberta to the Gulf Coast because, as the next section shows, a peroxide plant mostly serves the customers near it.

Why hydrogen peroxide is a regional business

The FTC put it plainly in its 2019 complaint: “There are high transportation costs associated with delivering hydrogen peroxide, particularly relative to the value of the product itself.” Peroxide is “delivered to customers predominantly by rail or truck,” producers “deliver from plants that are relatively nearer to customers,” and customers “are unlikely to purchase hydrogen peroxide outside of that market and transport it themselves.” Two pieces of chemistry sit behind that.

The first is that you are shipping water. Hydrogen peroxide is sold as a solution, and the water is most of the weight. Using the densities on our own product pages:

A 330-gallon tote of 30% peroxide weighs about 1,387 kg. About 416 kg of that is hydrogen peroxide and about 971 kg is water. Freight is charged on the whole 1,387 kg. That is the “relative to the value of the product” the FTC was describing: the further the tote travels, the more of the delivered price is the cost of moving water.

The second is that peroxide does not sit still. Hydrogen peroxide slowly breaks down into water and oxygen: 2 H₂O₂ → 2 H₂O + O₂. Every kilogram that decomposes gives off about 0.47 kg of oxygen, around 350 litres of gas at room temperature. Commercial solutions carry stabilizers to slow this, and the US shipping description for them reads “stabilized as necessary”. Containers are vented so the oxygen can escape instead of building pressure. Heat, sunlight and contamination all speed it up. None of this makes peroxide fragile in normal handling, but it does mean that time in transit and storage is not free. Our article on whether hydrogen peroxide expires covers the shelf-life side in detail.

That same logic is why people keep trying to make peroxide on site instead of shipping it at all. We covered two of those attempts in Rethinking Hydrogen Peroxide Production. It is also why the largest single users, such as the plants that make propylene oxide by the HPPO route, often sit next to a dedicated peroxide plant, as we described in our propylene oxide routes article.

What the FTC argued in 2019, and why it lost

In November 2018 Evonik agreed to buy PeroxyChem, then owned by private-equity funds, for about $625 million. In August 2019 the FTC sued to block the deal. Its complaint is a good map of the market as regulators saw it:

On 24 January 2020 the US District Court for the District of Columbia refused the FTC’s request for a preliminary injunction. The court found the agency’s product market was defined the wrong way round. The FTC had grouped all non-electronics grades together because producers can switch production between them, rather than asking whether customers treat those grades as substitutes. With no properly defined market, the case could not go on to concentration. Evonik closed the purchase in early February 2020 at a reported $640 million. To satisfy Canada’s Competition Bureau it agreed to sell the Prince George plant.

Two lessons from that case carry over to now, whichever way the BASF approach goes. Regulators look at peroxide region by region, because that is how it is bought. And they treat grade as a real dividing line: what counts as the same product depends on whether a customer can actually use it.

What a BASF–Evonik deal would and would not change

Nothing yet. There is no offer, and Evonik has said no talks are taking place. If a deal did happen it would take months of review, and it would be reviewed against the regional and grade lines above. This article does not assess whether BASF’s own businesses overlap with Evonik’s in hydrogen peroxide. Neither company’s statements address it, and the reporting we read does not either.

What a change of ownership at Evonik would not change is the chemistry. Peroxide will still be shipped mostly as water, it will still be made near its users, and the number of plants within freight range of any one buyer will still be small. A buyer’s practical exposure is to those few plants and to the grade they need, whoever owns them.

What to keep on file when buying hydrogen peroxide

None of this calls for buying ahead of need. It is a good moment to make sure your quotes compare like with like:

What this means on a specification

The takeover news changes none of the grade choices below. They depend on the job, and our hydrogen peroxide guide covers each concentration in depth.

A word on what this article does not say. It reports what BASF and Evonik have said, what the press has reported, and what the FTC wrote in 2019. It makes no claim about ours: which plant made the hydrogen peroxide we list, or how any of our suppliers would be affected by a change of ownership. Nobody writing this has checked the first for this article, and the second is not something a market-structure piece should guess at.

Common questions

Is BASF buying Evonik?

Not so far. On 25 September 2026 BASF confirmed exploratory talks with Evonik and its largest shareholder, RAG-Stiftung, about a possible takeover. Evonik said it had received a nonbinding approach and that no talks were taking place. The Financial Times and Reuters reported on 28 September that Evonik rejected an approach worth about €10.3 billion as too low. No offer has been made.

Why does an Evonik takeover matter for hydrogen peroxide?

Evonik says it has more than one million metric tons a year of hydrogen peroxide capacity at eighteen sites, five of them in North America. In 2019 the FTC described it as one of only five hydrogen peroxide producers in North America. Any change in who owns those plants matters to buyers because peroxide is supplied regionally, from a small number of nearby plants.

Why is hydrogen peroxide sold in regional markets?

Because it is shipped mostly as water. A gallon of 30% solution weighs about 4.20 kg and holds about 1.26 kg of peroxide; a gallon of 3% holds 0.115 kg. The FTC wrote that peroxide has high transportation costs relative to the value of the product, so producers deliver from the plants nearest their customers. Peroxide also slowly decomposes to water and oxygen, so time in transit is not free.

What happened when the FTC challenged Evonik’s purchase of PeroxyChem?

The FTC sued in August 2019, arguing the deal would concentrate peroxide supply in the Pacific Northwest and the Southern and Central United States. On 24 January 2020 a federal court in Washington, DC refused to block it, finding the FTC had defined the product market incorrectly. Evonik closed the deal in early February 2020 and agreed to sell the Prince George, British Columbia plant to satisfy Canadian regulators.

Who makes hydrogen peroxide in North America?

The FTC’s 2019 complaint named five producers: Evonik, PeroxyChem, Solvay, Arkema and Nouryon. PeroxyChem has since become part of Evonik, and its Prince George plant was sold. Evonik’s current site list shows hydrogen peroxide production at Mobile, Alabama; Bayport, Texas; Saratoga Springs, New York; Gibbons, Alberta and Maitland, Ontario.

Should buyers change anything because of the BASF approach?

Not their grade or their timing. Nothing has been agreed, and any deal would take months of review. The useful step is the one that helps in any market: compare quotes per kilogram of hydrogen peroxide rather than per gallon, keep freight separate, and record the grade and the certificate for each lot.

References & Authoritative Sources

Deal facts are from the companies’ statements as reported by trade press, and from reports citing unnamed sources, which are labelled as such. Market structure is quoted from the FTC complaint. Plant locations are from Evonik’s own site list. The chemistry uses our product-page densities and standard molar masses.

1. Ad hoc releases — BASF SE investor relations. The 25 September 2026 release confirming exploratory talks.
2. BASF Confirms Exploratory Talks on Potential Evonik Takeover — PCI Magazine, 27 September 2026. Both companies’ statements; RAG-Stiftung at about 44%; no price disclosed.
3. BASF confirms exploratory talks over possible Evonik acquisition — European Coatings, 28 September 2026. Nonbinding expression of interest; RAG-Stiftung at about 43%.
4. Evonik rejects BASF bid — BIC Magazine (Reuters), 2 October 2026. €10.3 billion; about €22.15 a share; sources close to the negotiations.
5. Germany’s Evonik rejects BASF’s $11.7 billion bid, sources say — Reuters via KSL. Rejected as too low to open formal talks or grant due diligence; BASF declined to comment on price.
6. Evonik produces hydrogen peroxide at eighteen locations across the world — Evonik Active Oxygens. Capacity above one million metric tons a year; North American site list.
7. In the Matter of RAG-Stiftung, Evonik Industries AG, et al., Complaint (PDF) — US Federal Trade Commission, Docket No. 9384, 2 August 2019. Every FTC quotation in this article.
8. Antitrust Month in Review, January 2020 — Paul, Weiss. The 24 January 2020 ruling and the court’s reasoning on market definition.
9. Evonik closes PeroxyChem buy — Speciality Chemicals Magazine, 4 February 2020. $640 million; Prince George to be sold as a condition of approval.
10. Does Hydrogen Peroxide Expire? — Alliance Chemical. Decomposition, stabilizers and shelf life.

The hydrogen peroxide we stock