Amazon sued over tariff refunds

Lisa Markland of Maryland and Mari Cartagenova of Massachusetts sued Amazon.com in federal court in Seattle on May 15, accusing the company of collecting tariff-related price increases from shoppers and then not returning that money after the underlying Trump-era duties were struck down. (dockets.justia.com) The proposed class action says Amazon, acting as importer of record for goods sold through its online store, built the cost of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act into consumer prices. The complaint alleges Amazon violated the Washington Consumer Protection Act and was unjustly enriched. Amazon had not sought reimbursement from the government, according to the complaint and reports about the filing. (timesofindia.indiatimes.com) ### Which lawsuit is this, exactly? Markland et al v. Amazon.com, Inc. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington under case number 2:26-cv-01670. The plaintiffs are represented by Hagens Berman, a Seattle-based class-action law firm. The May 15 complaint seeks declaratory and injunctive relief and asks the court to require Amazon to return to consumers money allegedly collected to cover the now-invalid tariffs, with interest. A PACER-hosted copy of the complaint says the plaintiffs also seek costs and other relief. ### What do the consumers say Amazon did wrong? The complaint says Amazon raised prices on imported goods while the IEEPA tariffs were in effect and passed those costs through to shoppers instead of absorbing them. (timesofindia.indiatimes.com) The named plaintiffs say they bought imported products on Amazon during the proposed class period and paid inflated prices because of those tariffs. (dockets.justia.com) Hagens Berman said the suit covers “millions” of consumers and alleges Amazon later let the federal government keep refund money that importers could pursue after the tariffs were invalidated. In the complaint, the plaintiffs said Amazon’s decision to skip recovery served “its own political and commercial interests” while consumers who bore the cost got nothing back. (pacermonitor.com) ### Why does the importer-of-record issue matter here? The U.S. Court of International Trade said on March 4, 2026, that “all importers of record” were entitled to benefit from the Supreme Court’s February decision striking down the tariffs, according to reports on the ruling. That matters because consumers generally cannot file directly for tariff refunds; the right to reclaim duties rests with the importer of record. (timesofindia.indiatimes.com) The plaintiffs’ theory depends on that gap. Their complaint says Amazon could identify tariff-related price components and, as importer of record, was positioned to seek refunds from the government, while consumers were not. (hbsslaw.com) ### What is the dispute over Amazon’s motives? The complaint points to Amazon’s abandoned April 2025 plan to display how much of a product’s cost came from tariffs. The suit says White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called that plan “a hostile and political act,” and says Amazon dropped it afterward. (timesofindia.indiatimes.com) The plaintiffs argue from that sequence that Amazon chose not to pursue refunds in order to avoid conflict with President Donald Trump’s administration. That is an allegation by the plaintiffs, not a finding by the court. (timesofindia.indiatimes.com) ### How big is the broader tariff-refund fight? Bloomberg reported on March 18 that nearly 1,000 new cases had been filed in the U.S. trade court since March 1 over tariff refunds, citing a review of public records. Times of India reported in February that the administration could face refund obligations tied to more than $130 billion in tariff collections, with some estimates running higher. (timesofindia.indiatimes.com) Those cases have focused on importers seeking money back from the government. The Amazon suit is different because it asks whether a retailer that allegedly passed tariff costs on to shoppers must return any recovered or recoverable funds to consumers. (timesofindia.indiatimes.com) ### What happens next in Seattle? The Western District of Washington docket shows the case was opened on May 15, 2026, and the complaint has been filed. The next steps typically include service on Amazon, a response from the company, and an eventual fight over whether the case can proceed as a class action. (bloomberg.com) Hagens Berman’s case page says the proposed class includes consumers who bought imported products on Amazon between February 4, 2025, and February 20, 2026. Court filings in Seattle will determine whether that class is certified and whether Amazon must answer the claims on the merits. (hbsslaw.com) (dockets.justia.com) (timesofindia.indiatimes.com)