Amazon sued over tariff refunds

Amazon.com was sued on May 15 in federal court in Seattle by consumers who say the company raised prices to cover Trump-era import tariffs and then kept the benefit after those duties were struck down. The proposed class action says Amazon passed tariff costs on to shoppers for imported goods sold on its platform between February 2025 and February 2026. When the U.S. Supreme Court later invalidated the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, the plaintiffs say Amazon did not seek the refunds available to importers. The suit says that left consumers paying for a charge the government could no longer lawfully keep. ### Which case is this, and where was it filed? The lawsuit is captioned *Lisa Markland et al. v. Amazon.com Inc.* and was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. Hagens Berman, the Seattle-based plaintiffs’ firm behind the case, lists the filing date as May 15, 2026, and the case number as 2:26-cv-01670. Seattle is central to the case because Amazon is headquartered there, and the complaint says a substantial part of the conduct at issue occurred in that district. (hbsslaw.com) Reuters reported on May 15 that the case was filed in federal court in Seattle as a proposed class action on behalf of consumers seeking refunds for tariff-related costs that Amazon allegedly passed through in higher prices. ### What do the plaintiffs say Amazon actually did? The complaint says Amazon began increasing prices on imported goods it sold directly to consumers after the Trump administration started imposing IEEPA tariffs in February 2025. Hagens Berman said the suit alleges Amazon collected funds from millions of customers through those higher prices while the tariffs remained in effect. (money.usnews.com) The plaintiffs say the company later chose not to pursue refunds from the federal government after the Supreme Court invalidated the tariffs in February 2026. Reuters, citing the complaint, said the suit accuses Amazon of collecting “hundreds of millions of dollars” in unlawful tariff costs and not returning any portion of those costs to consumers. (hbsslaw.com) The complaint frames that decision as deliberate. “The problem is that the funds Amazon is using to stay in the President’s good graces do not belong to Amazon,” the lawsuit says, according to the complaint summary published by Hagens Berman and Reuters’ account of the filing. ### Why couldn’t shoppers just get the money back from the government? (money.usnews.com) Importers, not retail customers, are the parties that pay tariffs to the government at the border. Reuters reported that consumers are not eligible to seek tariff refunds directly from the government for higher prices they say they absorbed while the duties were in effect. (hbsslaw.com) That structure is what gives the case its shape. The Supreme Court ruling opened a path for companies that paid the invalidated IEEPA tariffs to seek money back from the government, but the consumers suing Amazon say they were the ones who ultimately bore those costs through higher retail prices. ### Why does the lawsuit mention Trump and Jeff Bezos? (money.usnews.com) April 2025 is important to the plaintiffs because the complaint points to a political dispute between Amazon and the White House over tariff price disclosures. Hagens Berman said the suit cites reports that Amazon had planned to show how much of a product’s cost came from IEEPA tariffs before abandoning that plan after White House criticism. (finance.yahoo.com) Reuters reported that the lawsuit says President Donald Trump called Amazon Executive Chairman Jeff Bezos after reports that Amazon was considering displaying tariff-related price information. Amazon denied that it had considered listing tariff prices on its main retail site, Reuters said, but the plaintiffs use that episode to support their claim that politics influenced Amazon’s later decision not to seek refunds. (hbsslaw.com) ### What legal claims are in the case? Washington state law is part of the complaint. Reuters said the plaintiffs assert claims for unjust enrichment and for violating Washington’s consumer-protection law. The requested relief, as described by Hagens Berman’s case page, is aimed at forcing Amazon to return funds it allegedly collected from consumers to cover IEEPA tariffs between February 2025 and February 2026. (money.usnews.com) The suit also targets refunds Amazon is allegedly eligible to recover but has not pursued. ### What happens next in court? Amazon had not responded to Reuters’ request for comment as of May 15. (money.usnews.com) The case remains at an early stage in the Western District of Washington, where the court will next deal with the usual opening steps in a proposed class action, including Amazon’s response to the complaint and any fight over whether the case can proceed on behalf of a class. (hbsslaw.com) The docket number to watch is 2:26-cv-01670 in Seattle federal court. Hagens Berman’s case page lists the matter as active, and any answer, motion to dismiss, or class-certification schedule would appear there next. (hbsslaw.com) (money.usnews.com)