Published
July 2, 2026
If you bought products from Amazon between February 2025 and February 2026 — imported or U.S.-made — this lawsuit could affect you, though there is no settlement or claim form yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Amazon has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
Amazon.com, Inc. is facing a proposed class action lawsuit alleging that the e-commerce giant raised prices to pass tariff costs along to shoppers — including on U.S.-sourced goods that were never subject to tariffs — and now stands to collect government refunds of those same tariffs, while the shoppers who allegedly paid the inflated prices have no comparable path to get their money back. Amazon has not been found liable, and the allegations remain unproven.The case is captioned Rittenhouse v. Amazon.com, Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-03392, and is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The named plaintiff, a New York resident from West Islip, says he bought garden tools such as hose nozzles, hose splitters, and an electric wood chipper shredder directly from Amazon during the tariff period. According to the complaint, Amazon acts as the importer of record for a substantial portion of the imported goods it sells, signing the customs declarations and paying the tariffs at the border, then setting the retail prices its customers pay. The complaint asserts claims under New York's consumer protection statutes (General Business Law §§ 349 and 350) along with unjust enrichment and money had and received. Amazon has not been found liable, and the claims remain unproven.
Status
Complaint Filed · June 5, 2026
Proposed class action · Rittenhouse v. Amazon.com, Inc.
Allegation
Tariff costs passed to shoppers — including on non-tariffed U.S. goods — while Amazon stands to collect government refunds
IEEPA tariffs were struck down; the complaint alleges a potential double recovery worth hundreds of millions of dollars
Can I Claim?
No — nothing to claim yet
No settlement announced, no class certified, and no public consumer claim form at this stage
The Tariff "Double Recovery" Problem
The lawsuit fits a wave of consumer cases built on how U.S. tariff law works, alongside similar tariff-refund suits already filed against other major retailers like Ralph Lauren, Puma, Columbia Sportswear, IKEA, Nike, Walmart, and Costco. When a tariff is imposed, the importer of record — here, Amazon, for a substantial share of the goods it sells — pays the duty at the border and typically raises retail prices to recover that cost, so the shopper effectively pays part of the tariff at checkout.When a tariff is later struck down, the refund mechanism gives importers of record — not retail consumers — the direct path to seek reimbursement from the government. The refund flows back to whoever paid the duty at the border, not to the shopper who paid the higher retail price. The complaint argues this lets a large retailer collect higher prices from consumers during the tariff period and then collect a refund afterward, recovering twice for the same economic burden. It asks the court to require Amazon to return the tariff costs it allegedly passed on to customers, with interest, or a proportionate share of any tariff refunds Amazon recovers.
Higher Prices on U.S.-Made Goods, Too
A notable feature of this complaint is that it does not stop at imported products. It alleges that rather than confining tariff costs to the imported goods that generated them, Amazon spread those costs across its product line — raising prices on U.S.-sourced goods that were never subject to IEEPA tariffs. On that theory, the complaint proposes two subclasses: purchasers of tariffed imported goods, and purchasers of non-tariffed U.S.-sourced goods whose prices were allegedly inflated to offset Amazon's tariff costs elsewhere.The complaint cites independent research in support. It points to analyses finding that retail prices rose on both imported and domestically produced goods as retailers spread tariff-related costs across their product lines, that tariff pass-through added roughly 0.7 percentage points to the Consumer Price Index by September 2025, and that the lowest-priced product varieties saw the steepest increases — around 5 percent — because retailers had the least margin room to absorb the cost. Federal Reserve research cited in the complaint found that U.S. businesses and consumers together bore nearly 90 percent of the cost of the 2025 tariffs, and the complaint says American consumers paid more than $231 billion in tariff costs between February 2025 and January 2026 — an average of roughly $1,745 per family.
Amazon's Own Statements About Tariffs and Prices
The complaint leans on public statements by Amazon's Chief Executive Officer, Andy Jassy. In April 2025, Mr. Jassy said he expected sellers to pass the cost of the IEEPA tariffs on to consumers, and by January 2026 he acknowledged the tariffs had begun to "creep" into Amazon's prices, with increases in some cases unavoidable. The complaint also cites a June 2025 analysis of more than 1,400 China-made products sold by Amazon that found their median price rose 2.6 percent between January and mid-June 2025 — outpacing core-goods inflation — and a July 2025 study of 2,500 products finding Amazon had raised prices on roughly 1,200 low-cost goods by an average of 5.2 percent.The complaint further alleges that Amazon knows exactly how much of each price is tariff-driven: in April 2025, Amazon reportedly prepared to display, for each product, the amount of its price attributable to the tariffs — a plan it abandoned within days after the White House publicly objected and the President spoke with Amazon's founder. The complaint argues this shows Amazon tracks the tariff component of its prices and can identify each consumer who paid a tariff-inflated price from its transaction records.
The IEEPA Tariffs and the Supreme Court Ruling
Beginning in February 2025, the federal government imposed tariffs on imports from numerous countries by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs, invalidating those duties in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, 607 U.S. ___ (2026). In March 2026, the Court of International Trade ordered that entries subject to IEEPA tariffs be liquidated or reliquidated "without regard to IEEPA duties," opening the door for importers of record to recover what they paid. A U.S. Customs and Border Protection official estimated the total IEEPA duties collected at approximately $166 billion.That refund process is what the lawsuit targets. Importers can apply to recover the duties through U.S. Customs and Border Protection's CAPE tariff-refund portal — but consumers who shouldered the cost through higher prices have no direct government mechanism to get their money back. Given Amazon's size, the complaint alleges the company is likely entitled to collect hundreds of millions of dollars in refunds attributable to costs its customers actually bore.
What the Lawsuit Seeks
The complaint brings four claims — deceptive acts and practices under New York General Business Law § 349, false advertising under § 350, unjust enrichment, and money had and received — and asks the court to:• Certify the case as a class action, with the two proposed purchaser subclasses, and appoint the named plaintiff's counsel as class counsel.
• Declare that Amazon must return to class members all funds paid by consumers to cover IEEPA tariff costs, with interest.
• Enjoin Amazon from continuing the alleged unlawful and unfair pricing practices.
• Award restitution, damages (including treble and punitive damages where available), disgorgement, pre- and post-judgment interest, and attorneys' fees and costs.
All of these are requests for relief tied to unproven allegations; Amazon has not been found to have done anything unlawful, and no money has been awarded.
Is There an Amazon Tariff Settlement Yet?
No. This is important: Rittenhouse v. Amazon.com, Inc. is a newly filed lawsuit, not a settlement.That means:
• There is no settlement fund.
• There is no claim form.
• There is no payout, and no deadline to act.
• Consumers do not need to do anything at this stage.
The filing of a complaint is the very beginning of a case, not the end. Amazon has not been found liable simply because a lawsuit was filed, and the case remains pending unless and until a newer docket entry says otherwise. If the case is ever resolved through a settlement or a class is certified, a formal claims process with its own eligibility rules and deadlines would be announced separately.
Who Could Be Affected?
The complaint proposes two subclasses covering purchases made between February 4, 2025 and February 20, 2026 — the period the complaint says the IEEPA tariffs were in effect:• An Imported Product Subclass: people who bought goods from Amazon that were themselves subject to IEEPA tariffs, at prices Amazon allegedly increased to pass those tariffs through.
• A U.S.-Sourced Product Subclass: people who bought U.S.-sourced goods from Amazon that were not tariffed, at prices Amazon allegedly increased to spread its tariff costs across its product line.
No class has been certified, and the final class definitions, if any, could change. The complaint estimates the proposed class includes tens of millions of purchasers nationwide, identifiable through Amazon's own order and payment records. If you bought products from Amazon during that window, it may be worth keeping your order history handy in case a class is later certified and a claims process opens. There is nothing to file right now.
Beware of Amazon Tariff Refund Scams
Important: whenever a class action is filed against a household-name brand, scammers send fake "tariff refund" texts, emails, and calls asking shoppers to click a link, confirm bank details, or pay a small "processing fee." There is no Amazon tariff refund claim form right now, and Amazon has not announced any consumer refund program. A legitimate claims process — if one ever exists — would be run by a court-appointed settlement administrator, would be free to participate in, and would never ask for your banking passwords, gift cards, or up-front fees.What Happens Next?
From here, the case will move through the normal early stages of federal litigation. Amazon may file a response to the complaint or a motion to dismiss, the parties may exchange information in discovery, and the plaintiff would, at some point, ask the court to certify a class. Any of these steps can take months, and the case could also be amended, narrowed, or resolved along the way.OpenClassActions.com will continue watching the docket for any major updates, including a motion to dismiss, settlement talks, class certification activity, or any future claim form.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does the Amazon lawsuit allege?
According to the complaint, Amazon raised prices to pass IEEPA tariff costs to shoppers — spreading those costs even onto U.S.-sourced goods that were never tariffed — and, as an importer of record, stands to collect government refunds of those same tariffs after they were struck down, while its customers have no comparable refund process. The allegations are unproven.Is there anything to claim right now?
No. There is no settlement, no fund, and no claim form. Anyone asking you to file a claim or pay a fee for an Amazon tariff refund today is running a scam.Who could be covered?
Generally, U.S. purchasers who bought either tariffed imported goods or non-tariffed U.S.-sourced goods from Amazon at allegedly tariff-inflated prices between February 4, 2025 and February 20, 2026. The exact class definitions are not final because no class has been certified.Sources
• Class Action Complaint, Rittenhouse v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 2:26-cv-03392 (E.D.N.Y., filed June 5, 2026).• Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, 607 U.S. ___ (U.S. Feb. 20, 2026).
• Order, Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States, No. 1:26-01259 (Ct. Int'l Trade Mar. 4, 2026).
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
For more class actions keep scrolling below.
Status
Complaint Filed — Proposed Class Action
Case Title
Rittenhouse v. Amazon.com, Inc.
Case Number
2:26-cv-03392
Court
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York
Date Filed
June 5, 2026
Claims
NY GBL §§ 349 & 350; unjust enrichment; money had and received
