U.S. customers who bought Apple products or services directly from Apple between February 2025 and February 2026 may be covered by a proposed class action alleging Apple Inc. passed IEEPA tariff costs on through higher prices, including a $100 increase in the iPhone 17 Pro’s starting price, then kept the government refunds. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Apple Inc. 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?
Two New York buyers of Apple products filed a proposed class action against Apple Inc. on October 23, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York in Buffalo, where it is assigned to U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. Vilardo. The case, Mirabelli v. Apple Inc., No. 1:26-cv-02421, alleges that Apple shifted the cost of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) onto customers through higher prices on both imported and U.S.-sourced products, then recovered those same tariffs from the federal government after the Supreme Court struck them down. It is the first consumer tariff refund suit against Apple that OCA has found.The complaint pleads unjust enrichment, money had and received and violations of New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350, the state’s consumer protection and false advertising statutes. It asks for restitution, damages and a declaration that Apple must return the tariff charges it collected from consumers, with interest. Apple has not been found liable, no class has been certified, and there is nothing for customers to claim.
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.
What Apple Has Said About Tariffs and Refunds
Apple discussed its tariff costs openly with investors. According to the complaint, CEO Tim Cook said on May 1, 2025 that “most of our tariff exposure relates to the February IEEPA related tariff at the rate of 20%,” which applied to products made in China. Apple reported about $800 million of tariff-related costs in its June 2025 quarter and about $1.1 billion in its September 2025 quarter, and projected about $1.4 billion for the December quarter, the complaint says.Apple has also said its prices did not reflect tariffs. On September 19, 2025, the day the iPhone 17 lineup went on sale, Cook told CNBC: “There’s no increase for tariffs in the prices to be totally clear.” After the Supreme Court ruled, Cook told investors on April 30, 2026 that Apple was following the established refund process and planned “to reinvest any amount we receive back into US innovation and advanced manufacturing,” according to the complaint. Apple later reported that tariff refunds contributed about 2 percentage points to gross margin and $0.11 to diluted earnings per share in its June 2026 quarter. The complaint estimates that equals about $2.2 billion and cites a Wall Street Journal report that Apple’s refund had reached nearly that amount.
What the Lawsuit Alleges
The complaint’s main example is the iPhone 17 Pro. On September 9, 2025, Apple raised the Pro’s starting price from $999 to $1,099, the first increase in the entry Pro price since 2017, and dropped the 128GB base model so the line started at 256GB. The plaintiffs allege the extra storage was not worth the $100 difference, citing a TechInsights estimate that all 256GB of flash storage in the phone cost Apple about $13, and argue the change was a way to recover tariff costs without blaming tariffs.The complaint also points to a $0.50 monthly increase in AppleCare+ for iPhones in February 2025, an average cut of about 20% in maximum trade-in values in November 2025, and a $3 increase in the monthly price of Apple TV+ in August 2025. It alleges that because Apple sets one U.S. price for each product no matter where a unit was made, it spread tariff costs across items that were never tariffed. These are the plaintiffs’ allegations, and Apple has not responded to them in any filing OCA has reviewed.
Who Could Be Covered?
The complaint proposes two subclasses, both covering purchases made directly from Apple between February 4, 2025 and February 20, 2026. The Imported Product Subclass covers people who bought an Apple good or service that was itself subject to IEEPA tariffs, at a price Apple increased to pass those tariffs through. The U.S.-Sourced Product Subclass covers people who bought an Apple good or service that was not subject to IEEPA tariffs, at a price the plaintiffs say Apple increased to spread its tariff costs across its product line. Apple’s officers, employees and affiliates are excluded. No class has been certified, so these definitions are not final.What Happens Next?
A summons was issued on October 26, 2026, according to the docket. Apple will answer the complaint or move to dismiss it before the court considers class certification. Several other companies facing tariff refund suits, including Costco and Dyson, have moved to dismiss them. Counsel for the plaintiffs is Farrell & Fuller Law. OCA tracks every consumer tariff refund suit on its tariff class actions page.Questions
What is the Apple tariff refund lawsuit about?
A proposed class action filed October 23, 2026 in federal court in Buffalo, New York, alleges that Apple Inc. passed the cost of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) on to customers through higher prices, including a $100 increase in the iPhone 17 Pro’s starting price, then kept the refunds after the Supreme Court ruled those tariffs unlawful. Apple has not been found liable, and the allegations are unproven.
Did Apple raise iPhone prices because of tariffs?
That is disputed. The complaint points to the iPhone 17 Pro’s starting price rising from $999 to $1,099 in September 2025, when the 128GB base model was dropped. Apple CEO Tim Cook told CNBC on September 19, 2025, “There’s no increase for tariffs in the prices to be totally clear.” No court has decided the question.
How much did Apple get back in tariff refunds?
According to the complaint, Apple reported that tariff refunds added about 2 percentage points to its gross margin and $0.11 to diluted earnings per share in its June 2026 quarter. The complaint estimates that equals about $2.2 billion and cites a Wall Street Journal report putting Apple’s refund at nearly that amount. Apple has said it plans to reinvest refunds in U.S. innovation and manufacturing.
Who could be covered by the Apple tariff class action?
The complaint proposes two groups: people who bought an Apple product or service subject to IEEPA tariffs directly from Apple between February 4, 2025 and February 20, 2026 at a price Apple raised to pass the tariffs through, and people who bought a U.S.-sourced Apple good or service over the same period at a price the plaintiffs say was raised to spread tariff costs across the product line. No class has been certified.
Is there an Apple tariff refund settlement or claim form?
No. There is no settlement, claim form, payout or deadline. The case was filed in October 2026, and Apple has not yet responded to the complaint in any filing OCA has reviewed.
Sources
• Class action complaint, Mirabelli v. Apple Inc., No. 1:26-cv-02421 (W.D.N.Y., filed October 23, 2026), and the court docket• “Apple raises iPhone Pro starting price in U.S. for first time since 2017”, CNBC, September 9, 2025
• “Apple CEO Tim Cook says iPhone price hikes are not tied to tariffs”, CNBC, September 19, 2025
• Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, No. 24-1287 (U.S. February 20, 2026)
