Amazon Not Seeking Tariff Refunds to ‘Curry Favor’ With Trump, Class Action Lawsuit Alleges

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action lawsuit alleges that Amazon has refused to seek a tariff refund from the federal government because it aims to “curry favor” with President Donald Trump by allowing the administration to retain the money, to the detriment of consumers who paid inflated prices for imported goods.

Want to stay in the loop on class action lawsuits that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.

The 21-page lawsuit charges that Amazon’s decision to forgo tariff reimbursement—to which it is legally entitled in full from the federal government—serves the e-commerce giant’s “own political and commercial interests” at the expense of consumers who “bore the tariff costs in the first place” by way of higher prices.

“Amazon has not returned any portion of those costs it passed on to consumers, and it has no intention of doing so,” the complaint summarizes. “It has, in short, generated and retained a windfall from unlawful government action, and consumers—not Amazon—are the ones left paying for it.”

Shortly after the February 20, 2026 Supreme Court decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump that ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs overstepped the bounds of presidential authority, the Court of International Trade on March 4 ordered Customs and Border Protection to refund IEEPA tariff fees, saying that “[a]ll importers of record” are “entitled to the benefit” of the ruling, the case states. Importers of record take legal responsibility for compliance with import guidelines, pay tariffs and sign customs declarations when goods enter the country, per the filing.

Although Amazon is “legally entitled” to hundreds of millions of dollars in refunds from the federal government, the suit conveys that the retailer has decided to forego recovery to “ingratiate itself” with the president, who previously stated that he would “remember” which companies declined to seek refunds.

The filing contends that Amazon deceived consumers by not disclosing that it would not seek a refund of unlawful IEEPA tariffs, even if they were later invalidated. Regardless of Amazon’s apparent political maneuvering, “[t]he problem is that the funds Amazon is using to stay in the President’s good graces do not belong to Amazon,” the case contends.

The lawsuit says that the funds instead belong to consumers, who shouldered the economic burden of tariff-related price increases.

Tariff-related price increases had an enormous impact on consumers, the lawsuit says, citing a Wall Street Journal study of 2,500 products that indicated that prices for relatively inexpensive goods sold on Amazon increased 5.2 percent between January and July 2025, even as competitors like Walmart lowered their prices. Price increases far outpaced the current inflation rate of two percent for core goods, the suit conveys.

The Amazon tariff class action lawsuit looks to cover all individuals who, during the period beginning on February 4, 2025 through February 20, 2026, purchased any good subject to IEEPA tariffs from Amazon’s online stores and paid a surcharge to cover the IEEPA tariffs.

Check out ClassAction.org’s free legal resources to learn how to file a class action lawsuit.