A proposed class action filed in April 2026 accuses Nintendo of America of profiting twice from tariffs the Supreme Court later ruled unlawful: first by raising prices on U.S. customers to cover the duties, and again by suing the federal government for a refund of those same duties. The Nintendo tariff class action lawsuit, Hoffert et al. v. Nintendo of America Inc., is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington and seeks to force Nintendo to return any tariff-related overcharges to the consumers who paid them.1Ars Technica. Lawsuit: Nintendo Is Getting Tariff Refunds Its Customers Should Get Them Instead
What the Lawsuit Alleges
Plaintiffs Gregory Hoffert of Fair Oaks, California, and Prashant Sharan of Seattle say Nintendo raised retail prices starting in 2025 to offset tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, then quietly moved to recover those same tariffs from the government after the Supreme Court struck the duties down. The complaint calls it “double-dipping” and alleges Nintendo “has made no legally binding commitment to return tariff-related overcharges to the consumers who actually paid them.”1Ars Technica. Lawsuit: Nintendo Is Getting Tariff Refunds Its Customers Should Get Them Instead
The specific increases cited include a Nintendo controller that rose from $79.99 to $84.99 and a Switch 2 Dock Set that rose from $109.99 to $119.99.2KATU. Nintendo Customers Seek Share of Enormous Tariff Refunds in New Class Action Lawsuit Those were part of a broader August 2025 price hike that pushed the original Switch from $299.99 to $339.99, the Switch Lite from $199.99 to $229.99, and the Switch OLED from $349.99 to $399.99.3Polygon. Nintendo Switch Price Increase: How Much Nintendo publicly attributed the changes to “market conditions.”4CNBC. Nintendo Switch Price US Tariffs
Plaintiffs point to a May 2025 statement by Nintendo President Shuntaro Furukawa, who told investors that “if tariffs are imposed, we recognize them as a part of the cost and incorporate them into the price,” as evidence Nintendo always planned to pass the duties along.1Ars Technica. Lawsuit: Nintendo Is Getting Tariff Refunds Its Customers Should Get Them Instead
Who Is in the Proposed Class
The proposed class covers everyone in the United States who bought goods from Nintendo between February 1, 2025 and February 24, 2026, a window during which Nintendo raised prices. The complaint puts the amount in controversy above $5 million but does not name a specific damages figure.1Ars Technica. Lawsuit: Nintendo Is Getting Tariff Refunds Its Customers Should Get Them Instead The class has not been certified. No notice, claim form, or payout exists yet, and one will only exist if the court certifies the class or the parties reach a settlement.
Three legal theories drive the case. The first is unjust enrichment: that Nintendo should not be allowed to keep both the higher prices and the tariff refund. The second is a common-law claim for “money had and received,” which treats the tariff surcharge as money that belongs to the buyer, not the seller. The third alleges violations of the Washington Consumer Protection Act for raising prices, failing to disclose that Nintendo would seek tariff refunds, and then keeping those refunds.5Courthouse News Service. Hoffert v. Nintendo of America, Complaint
Why the Case Exists Now
The lawsuit is only possible because of the Supreme Court’s February 20, 2026 decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, which held 6-3 that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. The ruling invalidated duties in place since early 2025, including a reciprocal tariff on goods from Japan, where Nintendo’s parent company is headquartered. That rate stood at 24% before being reduced to 15% under a July 2025 executive order.6Supreme Court of the United States. Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, No. 24-12877WRAL. Nintendo Sues US Treasury, DHS, Seeks Tariff Refunds
On March 6, 2026, about six weeks before the consumer suit was filed, Nintendo sued the Treasury Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and other federal agencies in the U.S. Court of International Trade, seeking a full refund of the tariffs it had paid plus interest and attorney fees.8Yahoo Finance. Nintendo Suing U.S. Government Over Tariff Refunds That government refund action is what triggered the class action: the plaintiffs argue any money Nintendo recovers should flow through to the customers who absorbed the price increases in the first place.
Refunds have already started moving. Customs and Border Protection launched the first phase of its IEEPA refund system on April 20, 2026, and by mid-June had queued more than $95 billion in refunds out of roughly $166 billion in total IEEPA duties collected.9U.S. Customs and Border Protection. IEEPA Duty Refunds The Department of Justice appealed the underlying refund orders on June 3, 2026, so how much Nintendo ultimately receives, and when, is still unsettled.10Holland & Knight. IEEPA Tariff Refund Update: Government Appeals
The Arbitration Clause That Could Block the Class
Anyone hoping to be part of this case should understand the biggest obstacle. In May 2025, Nintendo updated its account user agreement to add a binding individual arbitration clause that expressly bars class proceedings. The clause states that “arbitration will be solely on an individual basis and not as a class arbitration, class action, or any other kind of representative proceeding.”11Polygon. Nintendo Switch EULA Lawsuit Class Action Users had 30 days to opt out by mailing a written notice to Nintendo.12Nintendo. EULA Update
Nintendo has enforced similar language successfully before. A 2020 Joy-Con drift class action was dismissed in 2023 after a federal judge found the plaintiffs were bound by the EULA.13Ars Technica. Judge Tosses Joy-Con Drift Class Action Because of Switch’s Pop-Up EULA A separate case, Diaz v. Nintendo, was dismissed in 2024. Whether the Hoffert case survives a motion to compel arbitration is an open question and likely to be the first serious fight in the litigation.
Where the Case Stands
As of mid-June 2026, the case is in its opening phase. It was reassigned in May to Judge Richard A. Jones. Nintendo’s deadline to respond to the complaint was extended to July 20, 2026, and a joint status report is due August 24. No motion to dismiss or motion to compel arbitration has been filed yet.14PACER Monitor. Hoffert et al v. Nintendo of America Inc Nintendo has not publicly commented on the suit.1Ars Technica. Lawsuit: Nintendo Is Getting Tariff Refunds Its Customers Should Get Them Instead
If you bought a Nintendo product in the U.S. during the class period, there is nothing to file right now. Keep your purchase records. The next meaningful moment will be Nintendo’s response in late July, which will show whether the company tries to send the case to individual arbitration or fights it on the merits.