Burger King Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026
- Investment
- $2.2M – $3.3M
- Disclosed sales
- $1.7M
- gross sales, not profit
- SBA charge-off
- 7.3%
- on 275 loans
Data from FDD filing + SBA 7(a) records
Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology
Burger King is a global quick-service burger chain built around flame-grilled Whoppers, chicken, and value combos. Franchisees run individual restaurants, kitchen, drive-thru, and staff, in a mature, thin-margin QSR market.
FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026
A BURGER KING franchise requires a total initial investment of $2.2M – $3.3M, including a $50K franchise fee and an ongoing 4.5% royalty[2]. Per the 2026 FDD, average unit revenue was $1.7M[2]. SBA 7(a) loans show a 7.3% charge-off rate across 275 loans[1]. FranchiseVerdict grade: B (Above average), an editorial assessment, not investment advice. Run a live ROI scan →
Sources, dates and evidence
FDD issued: 2026 filing · Data extracted: · Last cited check: · Staleness risk: low - the current year's filing
Evidence: strong✓ Investment (Item 7)✓ Item 19 status✓ Units and owners (Item 20)✓ SBA loan coverage✓ Litigation (Item 3)✓ Financial statements (Item 21)✓ Franchisor identityhow this is scored8 of 8 headline figures on this page cite a page of the filing.
Overview
- Investment
- $2.2M – $3.3M
- 99th pct Service Resta…
- Avg gross sales
- $1.7M
- 30th pct Service Resta…
- Royalty
- 4.5%
- 11th pct Service Resta…
- Units
- 6,650
- 96th pct Service Resta…
- SBA charge-off
- 7.3%
- % of SBA 7(a) loans not repaid · median varies by category
Quick verdict · Quick-Service Restaurants · color = vs category peers
Green = favorable by >10% vs Quick-Service Restaurants median · No shading = within ±10% · Red = unfavorable by >10% · Source: FDD filings + SBA 7(a)
Data from public FDD filings and SBA records. Not financial advice. Methodology
Bottom line
- COSTTotal investment $2.2M – $3.3M including a $50K franchise fee, 4.5% ongoing royalty.
- RETURNSAverage unit revenue of $1.7M/year (median $1.6M).
- RISKVerdict B (Above average), verdict score 60/100 (higher is better). SBA loan charge-off rate of 7.3% across 275 loans (near or below the 16% franchise average, based on all SBA 7(a) franchise lending, 2010–2025).
- GROWTHNegative: net -6 franchised outlets in the latest year (83 opened, 89 closed) (Item 20).
- LEGAL19 litigation matters disclosed in Item 3, higher than typical. Of the 15 listed on this page, 2 name the franchisor itself, 13 its parent, affiliates or predecessor. Pending claims are allegations, not findings.
Item 1 · who you're contracting with
The Franchisor
Corporate structure & franchisor financials
- Legal entity
- Burger King Company LLC
- Parent company
- Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership (RBILP)
- FDD Item 1, page 10 of the 2026 FDD
- Ultimate parent
- Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI)
- FDD Item 1, page 10 of the 2026 FDD
- Predecessor
- Burger King Corporation (BK Corporation)
- Prior franchisor entity
- CEO title
- President
- Thomas B. Curtis IV
- CEO experience
- 4 yrs
- Years in role or industry
- Incorporated in
- FL
- HQ
- 5707 Blue Lagoon Drive, Miami, Florida 33126
- Auditor
- KPMG LLP
- Audited financials
- Franchisor revenue
- $9.4B
- vs $8.4B prior year
- Management churn noted
- Frequent turnover
- Item 2 disclosed frequent executive changes
Independent franchisee associations
- Franchise Advisory Council (FAC)
Franchisee-led councils or alliances disclosed in Item 20. Indicates operator voice.
Affiliated brands
- Franchising Start Date Restaurant Count
Other brands the franchisor or its parent operates (Item 1).
Same owner · FDD Item 1, page 10
3 other brands on this site name Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI) as parent or ultimate parent in their own FDD.
Grouped by the owner's name as each filing prints it (this page: the 2026 FDD). Spelling variants of the same group may be listed apart; a brand is never grouped with an owner its filing does not name.
Overview
About
- CEO
- Thomas B. Curtis IV
- Headquarters
- FL
- Founded
- 1954
- FDD year
- 2026
- States available
- 51
Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?
Entry cost runs 474% above the typical quick-service restaurants franchise.
Source: FDD 2026 · Items 5–7
FDD Item 7 · 2026 filing
Initial investment breakdown
| Cost component | Low | High |
|---|---|---|
| Initial franchise fee | $50K | $50K |
| Working capital (3–6 mo) | $45K | $90K |
| Equipment, build-out, other | $2.2M | $3.2M |
| Total initial investment | $2.2M | $3.3M |
Source: BURGER KING 2026 FDD, Items 5 and 7[2]. “Equipment, build-out, other” is computed as total minus disclosed line items above.
Item 7 · what it costs to open + operate
The Vitals
- Total investment
- $2.2M – $3.3M
- Bottom third — review vs category
- Liquid capital req'd
- $45K – $90K
- Bottom third — review vs category
- Franchise fee
- $50K – $50K
- Bottom third — review vs category
- Royalty
- 4.5%
- typical 6–8%
- Ad fund
- 4.5%
- typical 3–5%
- Total fee load
- 6.0%
- vs 9–13% typical
Ongoing fees · Item 6
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Royalty | 4.5% of gross sales |
| Marketing / ad fund | 4.5% of gross sales |
| Technology fee | $110 |
| Training fee | $8K |
| Transfer fee | $2K |
| Renewal fee | $3K |
| Inventory (initial) | $6K – $13K |
| Total fee load | 6.0% of rev |
A 6.0% total fee load is unusually lean. More of each revenue dollar stays with the franchisee.
What do units actually make?
Average unit sales run 74% above the quick-service restaurants norm.
Source: FDD 2026 · Item 19
Single-unit · not modelled
Returns at a glance
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit, and the operating costs that turn one into the other are in no filing. We publish no modelled return for BURGER KING until someone supplies them — yours, in the models below.
—
Not modelled yet
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit. We hold no sourced figure for COGS, labour, rent / occupancy and other operating costs, and will not substitute an assumed one. Enter your own and the model runs on your assumptions.
Total invested capital · disclosed
$2.9M
Item 7 initial investment plus working capital, as filed — the one figure here that needs no assumption.
ROI & LBO modelsSingle-unit · 25-unit portfolio · editable
What one unit earns on your invested capital
Model A · Single-Unit Return
Computes unlevered return on invested capital (ROIC) for a single franchise unit, read against the 30–60% reference band · Yale SOM, Post-MBA Path Exhibit 2 (2023). Below that band a passive index fund likely outperforms; above it the franchisor has pricing power you're subsidizing.
Note: Item 19 revenue is what the franchisor discloses, and it is the top line only — gross sales are not profit. No FDD discloses the operating costs that turn one into the other, so those fields start empty and nothing is modelled until you supply them from your own lease quote, labor market and build-out budget.
Returns model · single-unit ROIC
What would one BURGER KING unit return on the cash you put in?
Illustrative category typicals — not sourced to any filing, survey or sample. Replace them with figures from franchisee validation calls before you rely on the output.
Unlevered ROIC · per unit
Your modelled return on total invested capital, before any debt financing.
—
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit. We hold no sourced figure for COGS, labour, rent / occupancy and other operating costs, and will not substitute an assumed one. Enter your own and the model runs on your assumptions.
What 25 units return when you use SBA financing
Model B · Return on Equity: Debt-Financed Acquisition
Models a 25-unit portfolio acquisition financed with an SBA 7(a) loan. Shows equity IRR (your return on cash invested), DSCR (how safely the cash flow covers debt service), and the capital stack (SBA + seller + equity breakdown).
This is the “search fund” or “entrepreneurship through acquisition” scenario: you buy an existing multi-unit operator, use leverage to amplify returns, and either operate or hire management. The 25-unit size is the typical minimum for an SBA-backed franchise portfolio acquisition to pencil as a full-time income.
What “return on equity” means here: if you put in $500K of your own cash and the business generates enough EBITDA to pay down debt and grow, your equity IRR is the annual return on that $500K, including the value created when you eventually sell. Target IRR for a search fund is typically 25–35%.
Not modelled yet
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit. We hold no sourced figure for COGS, labour, rent / occupancy and other operating costs, and will not substitute an assumed one. Enter your own and the model runs on your assumptions.
A 25-unit return is built on a per-unit EBITDA. Fill in the operating costs in Model A above and this model runs on that figure, or take the whole scenario to the full ROI workbench, where the portfolio and LBO models accept your own per-unit economics directly.
These models are for research and scenario planning only. Not investment advice. Actual results depend on your specific location, management, and market conditions. Consult a franchise attorney and accountant before signing any franchise agreement.
Item 19 · Source: 2026 FDD
Financial Performance
- Avg gross sales
- $1.7M
- Per unit, per year
- Median gross sales
- $1.6M
Gross sales are revenue before expenses — not profit. Actual owner earnings depend on rent, labor, royalties, marketing fees, and debt service.
- Item 19 type
- gross sales
- Sample size
- 4,730 outlets
- vs category median 19 · large
- Range (low → high)
- $189K→$5.5MCited, not corroborated — printed on page 102 of the 2026 FDD. Nothing else in our record independently restates or re-derives it.
- Cohort dispersion (min → max)
- Reporting year
- 2025
- Fiscal year the figures cover
- Source filing
- FDD 2026
- Disclosed in the 2026 filing, covering 2025
Compared against 781 Quick-Service Restaurants brands
Revenue is only 0.6x the investment. This means each unit may take 5+ years to recoup the initial outlay at typical margins.
Operator outlook
What the numbers say
Data-driven interpretation of this brand's financial disclosures, fee structure, and system trajectory.
Unit economics
Average unit generates $1.7M/year in gross sales. Revenue-to-investment ratio: 0.6x.
Fee burden
Total ongoing fee load of 6.0% — below the Quick-Service Restaurants median of 7.5%.
Disclosure
Transparency score 0/10 — minimal disclosure beyond the required average. Hard to judge the distribution of outcomes across units.
Operator retention
System contracting at -16.9% CAGR over 3 years. Investigate whether closures are franchisor-driven consolidation or franchisee exits.
Source: FDD Item 19 financial performance representations and publicly filed FDD data. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Verify all figures with the franchisor and current franchisees before making any investment decision.
vs Quick-Service Restaurants medians
How Burger King Compares
Category median of published Quick-Service Restaurants brands that report the figure; the middle half spans the 25th to 75th percentile and n counts the brands behind it. Medians are used because a few very large systems pull an average far from the typical brand. Revenue is disclosed gross sales, not profit.
Is the system healthy?
Source: FDD 2026 · Item 20
Unit growth
Item 20 · unit dynamics
The Growth Chart
- Total units
- 6,650
- Opened
- 83
- Last reporting year
- Closed
- 89
- Terminated
- 7
- Franchisor ended the franchise (per Item 20)
- Non-renewed
- 33
- Term expired, not renewed (per Item 20)
- Turnover rate
- 1.3%
- Company-owned
- 1,132
- Corporate units in the system
- % franchised
- 83%
- vs corporate-owned
- Net growth (3-yr)
- +0.1%
- Net unit change over 3 years
- 3-yr CAGR
- -16.9%
- Compounded over last 3 years
Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers
- Terminated
- 7
- Not renewed
- 33
- Transferred
- 242
- Reacquired
- 13
- Franchisor bought back
- Signed, not yet open
- 0
- 0.00 per open outlet · Item 20 Table 5
- Projected new
- 39
- Franchisor's next-year forecast
- Transfer rate
- 3.6%
- Owners selling to other franchisees
- Continuity rate
- 98.4%
- Units that stayed open
- Termination rate
- 0.6%
- Franchisor-initiated terminations
- Ceased ops
- 0.5%
- Units that stopped operating
Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.
Item 20 · 51 states with active franchisees
The Territory Map
Derived from franchisee contact records. Shows states with at least one current operator. Not where the franchisor is registered to sell new units (that data is re-extracting in a future refresh).
States derived from franchisee contact records (FDD Item 20). Shows states with at least one current operator on file. Full state registration data (Item 12) will appear on a future FDD refresh.
Where the owners are · Item 20 owner list
6,588 current owners across 51 states; 75 former (terminated, transferred or not renewed) listed separately.
- TX 569
- CA 479
- FL 464
- NY 353
- OH 288
- PA 271
- GA 270
- IL 268
- MI 243
- NC 232
- IN 185
- TN 177
- +39 more states
Counts only, from the list the franchisor prints in Item 20. Names and phone numbers are for your own due diligence and are not shown here.
SBA loan performance
Government records
SBA Loan Data
Aggregated from SBA 7(a) and 504 loan disclosures, public data unique to FranchiseVerdict.
- Total loans
- 275
- Loan volume
- $196.1M
- Median loan
- $451K
- 50th percentile
- Charge-off rate
- 7.3%
- on 275 loans · rates vary by category · see methodology
Historical SBA 7(a) lending data, not predictive of future performance. How SBA charge-off rates are calculated
- Repayment rate (PIF)
- 92.7%
- 5-yr charge-off
- 0.0%
- Loans approved 2021+
- Active lenders
- 84
- Defaults
- 17
- Typical loan rate
- 6.4%
- avg rate to borrowers
- Franchised industry avg
- 10.8%
- brand beats franchise avg ↓
- Jobs supported
- 8,420
- 4.3 per loan
- Lender concentration
- 17%
- top lender's share
Borrower mix: 11% went to startups / new businesses, 89% to established operators
Franchise vs independent — in limited-service restaurants, franchised businesses charge off at 10.8% vs 10.0% for independents — franchising is associated with 8% higher SBA default risk in this category.
Vintage analysis
Burger King charge-off rate by loan vintage
Top lenders financing Burger King franchisees
Showing 3 of 84 lenders. The full breakdown — every lender, state distribution, interest rates & risk ratings — is in the SBA Lending Report below.
Explore lender portfolios on Bank Reports or regional data on State Reports.
Lender network · 7(a) + 504
SBA Lending Report
Full lending analysis for Burger King from SBA 7(a) FOIA data.
- Principal loss rate
- 3.4%
- Avg SBA guarantee
- 74%
- Avg interest rate
- 6.36%
- Avg chargeoff amount
- $393K
- Lender concentration
- 16.7%
- Job velocity
- 4.3 per $100K
- NAICS benchmark
- 8.7%
- NAICS 722513
- Jobs supported
- 8,420
Top SBA lendersTop lender holds 17% of loans
| # | Lender | Loans | Volume | Default % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wells Fargo Bank National Association | 46 | $20.9M | 4.3% |
| 2 | Northeast Bank | 14 | $350K | 0.0% |
| 3 | Readycap Lending, LLC | 11 | $8.2M | 9.1% |
| 4 | PNC Bank, National Association | 9 | $3.3M | 11.1% |
| 5 | Columbia Bank | 7 | $3.7M | 14.3% |
| 6 | BMO Bank National Association | 7 | $3.3M | 16.7% |
| 7 | U.S. Bank, National Association | 7 | $4.1M | 0.0% |
| 8 | JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association | 7 | $4.8M | 0.0% |
| 9 | Citizens & Northern Bank | 7 | $5.5M | 0.0% |
| 10 | TD Bank, National Association | 6 | $1.6M | 0.0% |
Geographic failure vector
| State | Loans | Defaults | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| CACalifornia | 56 | 1 | 1.9% |
| NJNew Jersey | 37 | 0 | 0.0% |
| NYNew York | 21 | 3 | 17.6% |
| TXTexas | 18 | 0 | 0.0% |
| ILIllinois | 16 | 0 | 0.0% |
| MIMichigan | 16 | 3 | 18.8% |
| AZArizona | 10 | 2 | 20.0% |
| FLFlorida | 10 | 0 | 0.0% |
| MDMaryland | 8 | 0 | 0.0% |
| OHOhio | 8 | 1 | 20.0% |
SBA 7(a) lending trend
Borrower profile
Source: SBA 7(a) + 504 FOIA loan-level data, matched by FranchiseVerdict
What could kill this investment?
SBA loans charge off at 7.3% — 54% below the 16.0% national norm, i.e. lower lender-observed risk.
Source: SBA 7(a) FOIA · FDD Items 3, 21
Risk analysis
FranchiseVerdict rating + FDD Items 3, 4, 8, 16, 21
Risk & Legal
Litigation (Item 3)
Subject: the franchisor is a named party (defendant).
Two pending cases where BKC/predecessor is defendant (FIF v. BK Corp - $500M+ claim re alleged oral franchise agreement in Canada; Arrington - antitrust class action re no-solicitation clause). One franchisor-initiated suit (BKC v. Chaus - enforcement of franchise termination). Several concluded cases. Multiple affiliate cases not involving BKC directly.
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None disclosed
Audited financials (Item 21)
Yes · KPMG LLP
Franchisor revenue (Item 21)
Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)
Item 21 financial statements are the audited consolidated statements of Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI), the ultimate parent and guarantor of franchisor Burger King Company LLC; figures in USD millions, fiscal years ended Dec 31 2025 (yr1) and 2024 (yr2). Audited by KPMG LLP. Other revenue is 'Advertising revenues and other services' line ($1,217M). Net income $1,075M is total net income including discontinued operations; net income from continuing operations was $1,201M; net income attributable to common shareholders was $776M. The franchisor entity itself does not issue separate stand-alone audited statements in this FDD.
ⓘ These are the parent company's consolidated financials (the parent guarantees the franchisor), not this brand's standalone results — the figure reflects the whole corporate group, not this brand alone.
Supplier relationship · Items 8 & 16
- Franchisor sells you products: Yes
- Kickbacks from required suppliers: Yes
- Must buy proprietary products: Yes
- Restricted to system-approved products: Yes
- Can negotiate own supplier terms: No
Score breakdown · what drove the 60 / 100 verdict
- 01MINORWide investment range ($348k-$3.3M) indicates highly variable unit economics and unpredictable capital requirements
- 02MEDRoyalty rates hidden in Item 6 without summary — suggests complex or potentially unfavorable fee structure not disclosed upfront
- 03MINORNo going concern issues reported, but absence of average revenue/net income data prevents fundamental financial viability assessment
Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification
Litigation case detail19 matters · Item 3
Litigation cases
The franchisor
Concluded (1)
Burger King Company LLC (United States), Fast Food Sudamerica, S.A. (Argentina), Alsea Global, S.L. (Spain), Operadora Internacional Alsea S.A. de C.V. (Mexico) and Alsea S.A.B. de C.V. (Mexico)
judgmentThird-party plaintiff · filed 2023-12-19 · ICC (arbitration) · ICC Case No. 28320/PDP (EPP)
“On December 19, 2023, BKC, as franchisor, and Fast Food Sudamerica, S.A. (“FFS”), as franchisee, along with the Alsea Entities as guarantors, filed a Joint Request for Arbitration, stemming from a dispute involving existing franchise agreements and the development of Burger King® restaurant locations in Argentina.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Status not stated in the filing (1)
Burger King Company LLC v. Altaf A. Chaus
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2026-03-12 · United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida · 1:26-cv-21647-MD
“Franchisor-Initiated Suits: Enforcement of Franchise Termination Obligations: Burger King Company LLC v. Altaf A. Chaus, United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 1:26-cv-21647-MD, filed on March 12, 2026.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Parent, affiliates and predecessor
Pending (11)
ADP Direct Poultry Ltd. v. Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen, Inc., Restaurant Brands International Inc., Restaurant Services Canada Inc., Amjad Farooq Inc., et al.
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen, Inc. (PLK), with parent Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI) · filed 2025 · Ontario Superior Court of Justice · CV-25-00741914-0000
“On May 29, 2025, PLK and RBI were served with a Statement of Claim (amended on June 23, 2025) by ADP Direct Poultry Ltd., a former supplier of chicken to the Popeyes Canada franchise system. ADP’s comprehensive commercial claim alleges breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and honest performance in contractual relations, misrepresentations, conspiracy, negligence”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Daniel Pemberton v. Restaurant Brands International, Inc. & Restaurant Brands International US Services LLC
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Restaurant Brands International, Inc. (RBI) and Restaurant Brands International US Services LLC · filed 2025-05-02 · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · 4:25-cv-03647-JCS
“The complaint alleges that www.bk.com secretly allowed third-party advertising and analytics firms (Google, Meta/Facebook, Microsoft Clarity, Snap, The Trade Desk, AdTheorent and others) to place tracking cookies on visitors to the website, even after users opted out through the website’s cookie-consent banner.”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Payal Keswani and Kendra Sivertson v. PH Canada Company, Pizza Hut International, LLC, Domino’s Pizza, Inc., Domino’s Pizza of Canada Ltd., Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc., Little Caesar of Canada ULC, Papa John’s International, Inc., PIZZAPIZZA Limited, Fresh Slice Holdings Ltd., Popeyes Louisiana
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen, Inc. (PLK), with parent Restaurant Brands International, Inc. (RBI) · filed 2025-06-18 · Supreme Court of British Columbia · VLC-S-S-254553
“On June 18, 2025, a proposed class action was filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia against PLK, RBI, and 10 other fast-food companies and their affiliates. The claim, brought under the Class Proceedings Act, alleges that the defendants used unlawful “drip pricing” tactics on their proprietary digital platforms.”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Jonathan Deschatelets v Restaurant Brands International Inc., Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership and The TDL Group Corp.
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI), Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership, with affiliate The TDL Group Corp. · filed 2024-04-19 · Superior Court of Quebec · 500-06-001306-246
“On April 19, 2024 Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against Tim Hortons before the Superior Court of Quebec. Plaintiff is a consumer who has been using the Tim Hortons mobile application for several years. Plaintiff alleges that The TDL Group Corp. (“TDL”) sent an email to approximately 500,000 customers stating that they won a boat worth CAD $64,000 as part of the Roll Up To Win promotion.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Liel Ohayon v. Starbucks Coffee Canada, Inc., Starbucks Corporation, Foodtastic Inc., (a.d.b.a. Second Cup), The TDL Group Corp., Restaurant Brands International Inc., and Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI) and Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership (RBILP), with affiliate The TDL Group Corp. · filed 2024-12-30 · Superior Court of Quebec · 500-06-001351-242
“An application for authorization to institute a class action was filed on December 30, 2024 in the Superior Court of Quebec based on allegations of price-gouging for non-dairy milk substitutes in beverages by RBILP, RBI, TDL, and other food or beverage companies.”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Plymouth County Retirement Association, Scott Hamparian, Emad Tadros and Zeiad Tadros V. Restaurant Brands International Inc., Matthew Perelman and Alexander Sloane
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI) · filed 2024-10-07 · Court of Chancery of State of Delaware · C.A. No 2024 – 1030
“Purported former shareholders of Carrols Restaurant Group, Inc. (“CRG”) filed a complaint in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against RBI and two individual directors that were on the board of CRG. The complaint alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duty by RBI, as a purported controlling shareholder of CRG engaging in unfair dealing leading to an unfair transaction”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Burger King Europe GmbH and Burger King Spain, S.L. vs. Kasba Internacional S.L. and Alfonso Manuel Arroyo Sanchez
pendingBrought against a franchisee · Burger King Europe GmbH (BKE), with its master franchisee Burger King Spain, S.L. · filed 2023-07-10 · Court of First Instance of Madrid · 1598/2023
“On July 10, 2023, BKE and its master franchisee in Spain, Burger King Spain, S.L. (“BKS”) filed a claim against a legacy Burger King franchisee in Spain, Kasba Internacional S.L. (“Kasba”) and its owner, Alfonso Manuel Arroyo Sanchez (“Arroyo”), seeking unpaid royalties and advertising fund contributions of EUR 3,565.94 in the aggregate and termination of the franchise agreement.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Olympia Tile International Inc. vs. Restaurant Brands International Inc., The TDL Group Corp., Ricky Leem and Gesco Limited Partnership
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI), with affiliate The TDL Group Corp. · filed 2020-09-25 · Ontario Court of Justice · CV-20-00648343-0000
“Plaintiff is claiming damages of $3,500,000 and $500,000 in punitive damages on the basis of breach of contract, intentional interference in economic relations, and fraudulent misrepresentation and conspiracy arising from inventory allegedly purchased on behalf of Tim Hortons/its franchisees in reliance of its forecasted demand of these tiles for its renovation program.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Arrington v. Burger King Worldwide, Inc.
pendingThird-party plaintiff · BK Corporation and various affiliates (Burger King Worldwide, Inc.; Restaurant Brands International Inc.) · filed 2019-03-15 · United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida · 18-24128-CV-MARTINEZ/AOR
“Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants violated Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by incorporating an employee no-solicitation and no-hiring clause in the standard form Franchise Agreement all franchisees must sign. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief and damages for themselves and other members of the class.”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
First International Fund Ltd. v. Burger King Corporation et al.
pendingThird-party plaintiff · BK Corporation (Burger King Corporation) · filed 2013-08-28 · Ontario Superior Court of Justice · CO-13-487734
“On August 28, 2013, First International Fund Ltd. (“FIF”), an entity owned by Marc Vaturi, President of Triple Five International Group Ltd., sued BK Corporation and BK Corporation’s former master franchisee in Canada. FIF alleges that on January 28, 2013, before the incorporation of FIF, Vaturi reached a binding verbal agreement with representatives of BK Corporation”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Mister Crab s.r.l., Krusty s.r.l. and Gianni Ugolini vs Burger King Europe GmbH, Burger King SEE (Switzerland) AG and Burger King Restaurants Italia s.r.l.
pendingBrought by a franchisee · Burger King Europe GmbH (BKE) · Milan Tribunal · 33924/2024
“The claimants allege that certain of the clauses of the franchise agreements, including in particular the clauses which provide for payment of royalties and advertising contributions calculated as a percentage of gross sales, should be declared void, and consequently that the royalties and advertising contributions paid by Mister Crab over the years be reimbursed.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Concluded (2)
QSR Services Corp. vs Burger King Restaurants of Canada Inc.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Burger King Restaurants of Canada Inc. (“Canada”) · filed 2012-11-29 · Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada · CHI-S-S-25495
“QSR Services Corp. (“QSR”), a former franchisee of Burger King Restaurants of Canada Inc. (“Canada”), commenced a lawsuit in British Columbia, claiming damages for loss of profit and loss of capital/sale price, totaling CAD $863,000 as a result of the alleged encroachment/reduction of sales at one of QSR’s restaurants allegedly due to the reopening of a restaurant”Page 26 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Burger King Corporation vs. Burger Gulf Coast, LLC and Anand Patel
settledBrought against a franchisee · BK Corporation (Burger King Corporation) · Miami-Dade County Circuit Court · 2021-002708-CA-01
“BK Corporation sued Defendants for breach of the Lease/Sublease Agreement and breach of the Guarantee for their failure to remit the insurance proceeds to it. The parties attended mediation on March 24, 2023 and a settlement agreement was entered into shortly thereafter.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
This list shows 15 of the 19 matters Item 3 discloses; the rest are in the filing.
Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.
What are you signing up for?
Ongoing fees run about 6.0% of sales (royalty + ad fund), before rent and labor.
Source: FDD 2026 · Items 11, 12, 17
FDD Items 12, 15, 17 · continued from Risk & Legal
Contract & Territory Detail
| Initial term | 20 years |
|---|---|
| Renewal term | 20 years |
| Allowed renewalsℹ | 1 |
| Territory type | No territory protection |
| Protected territory | No |
| Exclusive territoryℹ | No |
| Online sales rightsℹ | Granted |
| Franchisor can compete | Yes |
| Hire a manager? | Allowed |
| Owner-operator | Optional |
| Non-compete (years)ℹ | 1 year |
| Non-compete (miles)ℹ | 2 mi |
| Right of first refusalℹ | Yes |
| Transfer requires consent | Yes |
| Termination notice | 30 days |
| Termination groundsℹ | 2 |
| Curable defaultsℹ | 3 |
| Mandatory arbitration | No |
| Arbitration location | Miami-Dade County, Florida |
| Jury trial waiver | Yes |
| Governing law | FL |
| Litigation count | 19 |
View Item 3 litigation summary
Two pending cases where BKC/predecessor is defendant (FIF v. BK Corp - $500M+ claim re alleged oral franchise agreement in Canada; Arrington - antitrust class action re no-solicitation clause). One franchisor-initiated suit (BKC v. Chaus - enforcement of franchise termination). Several concluded cases. Multiple affiliate cases not involving BKC directly.
Items 10, 11
Training & Operations
- Classroom training
- 20 hrs
- On-the-job training
- 320 hrs
- Training location
- Miami, Florida or other locations specified by franchisor; in-restaurant training at authorized Training Restaurants
- Ongoing training
- Required
- Site selection
- franchisee with franchisor approval
- Franchisor financing
- Offered
- Item 10
- POS system
- Integrated electronic register system (Global POS Policy)
- Operating tech stack
Items 5 & 11
Franchisor Support
Technology: Integrated electronic register system (Global POS Policy)
Item 20 · call current owners
Franchisee Contacts
6,663 owners to call
Name · phone · city · state. Extracted from FDD Item 20
Frequently asked questions
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does it cost to open a BURGER KING franchise?
The total investment to open a BURGER KING franchise ranges from $2.2M – $3.3M, with an initial franchise fee of $50K. This includes real estate, equipment, inventory, and working capital as disclosed in their Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD).
What do BURGER KING franchise owners earn?
According to Item 19 of the BURGER KING FDD, the average gross sales per unit is $1.7M. The median is $1.6M. Note: this is gross revenue, not profit. Actual owner earnings vary based on location, operating costs, and management.
Who owns BURGER KING?
BURGER KING is franchised by Burger King Company LLC. Its parent company is Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership (RBILP). The ultimate parent named in the FDD is Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI). Source: FDD Item 1, 2026 filing.
What is Item 19 in the BURGER KING FDD?
The FDD section where a franchisor may disclose financial performance of its outlets. Disclosure is optional and formats vary; figures are typically gross sales, which is revenue before expenses, not profit. FranchiseVerdict extracts these figures directly from the BURGER KING FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.
What is BURGER KING's franchise failure rate?
Based on SBA 7(a) loan data, BURGER KING has a charge-off rate of 7.3% across 275 loans, meaning 7.3% of franchise loans were charged off. Charge-off rates are one proxy for franchise risk, though they do not capture all closures. This data comes from FOIA-sourced SBA lending records.
How many BURGER KING franchise locations are there?
As of their most recent FDD filing, BURGER KING has 6,650 total units in the United States, including 5,518 franchised units and 1,132 company-owned units. 83 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.
Is BURGER KING a good franchise to buy?
FranchiseVerdict rates BURGER KING as a B-grade franchise with a verdict score of 60 out of 100 (higher is better). The grade is a deterministic score built from six weighted dimensions — financial health, unit economics, unit growth, scale, legal, and transparency — then calibrated against SBA loan charge-off rates and FDD age. Transparency is one of the six, so a filing that discloses less scores lower on that dimension than one that discloses more. Our rating is based solely on publicly available FDD and government data; we recommend speaking with current franchisees before making any investment decision. This is not investment advice.
Data sourced from public FDD filings and SBA 7(a) FOIA records. Not financial advice.
For franchisors
Are you the franchisor?
If you represent BURGER KING, you can request corrections or provide updated information.
Other Quick-Service Restaurants franchises
Compare similar franchise opportunities in the Quick-Service Restaurants category
Data extracted from public FDD filings and SBA 7(a) loan disclosures (FOIA). This information is provided for research purposes only and does not constitute financial, legal, or investment advice. Verify all figures with the franchisor's current Franchise Disclosure Document before making any investment decision.