Consumers who paid tariff-related fees or higher prices may be affected by recently filed proposed class actions alleging that companies retained tariff-related amounts after receiving refunds from the federal government.

Kehoe Law Firm is investigating potential claims involving manufacturers, retailers, online marketplaces, shipping companies, customs brokers, and other businesses that may have passed tariff costs to consumers, but did not provide a corresponding refund or credit after receiving—or becoming eligible to receive—a government refund.

Who May Be Affected?

You may be affected if you purchased a product or service for which:

• A tariff, duty, import charge, or related fee appeared separately at checkout;
• The seller, manufacturer, marketplace, or shipping company attributed a price increase to tariffs;
• A tariff-related cost was included in the product’s purchase price, shipping charges, or import fees; and
• You did not receive a corresponding refund or credit after the company received or became eligible to receive a refund for the tariff.

The investigation is not limited to any particular company, product, marketplace, or shipping program. Consumers should preserve receipts, invoices, order histories, checkout records, and communications describing tariff-related charges or price increases.

Recent Lawsuits Illustrating the Issue

Recently filed proposed class actions involving Logitech and Pitney Bowes provide two examples of how tariff-related costs may have been passed to consumers. The allegations differ: the Logitech case concerns alleged tariff-related increases embedded in product prices, while the Pitney Bowes case concerns alleged tariff charges collected from buyers through eBay’s Global Shipping Program.

These lawsuits are examples of the broader issue and do not represent every company or transaction that may be affected.

What Is the Issue?

Beginning in February 2025, the federal government imposed tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, commonly called IEEPA. On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court held that IEEPA did not authorize the President to impose tariffs.

The complaints allege that some companies passed IEEPA tariff costs to consumers through separate checkout charges or higher product prices. They further allege that those companies later received, or became eligible to receive, government refunds without returning the corresponding amounts to the consumers who allegedly bore the cost.

At the center of these cases is a disputed question: when a consumer allegedly paid the economic cost of a tariff, may the company retain both the consumer-paid amount and the government refund?

Logitech Tariff Refund Lawsuit

On August 18, 2026, SJK Development, Inc. and Ala Awadalla filed a proposed class action against Logitech Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint is captioned SJK Development, Inc. and Ala Awadalla v. Logitech Inc., No. 5:26-cv-08570.

The complaint alleges that Logitech raised U.S. retail prices across approximately half of its product catalog in or about April 2025, by an average of approximately 14% and by as much as 25% for some products. It alleges that Logitech attributed the increases to tariff costs and that the price increases more than offset the company’s tariff costs.

The plaintiffs further allege that Logitech had received $61 million in refunds for the challenged tariffs as of June 30, 2026, including $15 million during the first quarter of fiscal year 2027 and $46 million after the quarter ended. According to the complaint, Logitech had not refunded or credited customers for the alleged tariff component of the prices they paid.

The proposed nationwide class is defined in the complaint as all persons in the United States who, between February 4, 2025 and February 24, 2026, purchased for personal, family or household use a Logitech-branded product whose U.S. retail price was increased on or after February 4, 2025. The proposed class excludes, among others, people who purchased for resale.

Read the complaint: SJK Development, Inc. and Ala Awadalla v. Logitech Inc. – Class Action Complaint (Filed August 18, 2026)

Pitney Bowes and eBay Global Shipping Program Tariff Refund Lawsuit

On August 14, 2026, Jerome Luby, Christopher Vila, and Nicholas Hughes filed a proposed class action against Pitney Bowes Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. The complaint is captioned Luby et al. v. Pitney Bowes Inc., No. 3:26-cv-01311. eBay is not named as a defendant.

The complaint alleges that Pitney Bowes managed shipping and import logistics for purchases made through eBay’s Global Shipping Program and collected IEEPA tariff charges from buyers as a separate line item. It further alleges that Pitney Bowes received $5 million in IEEPA tariff refunds during the second quarter of 2026, but had not returned corresponding tariff amounts to the buyers who allegedly paid them.

The proposed nationwide class is defined in the complaint as all persons in the United States who purchased goods through the Global Shipping Program from February 1, 2025 through February 24, 2026 and were charged prices that included IEEPA tariff costs.

Read the complaint: Jerome Luby, Christopher Vila, and Nicholas Hughes v. Pitney Bowes Inc. – Class Action Complaint (Filed August 14, 2026)

What Records Should Consumers Save?

Consumers should consider preserving records that show what they purchased, what they paid, and how any tariff-related amount was described, including:

• Receipts, invoices, order confirmations, and online order histories;
• Credit-card or bank statements showing the purchase;
• Checkout screens or invoices listing tariffs, duties, import charges, or related fees;
• Product pages, emails, or notices connecting a price increase to tariffs;
• Refund notices, credits, or customer-service communications; and
• The product name, model number, purchase date, seller, and amount paid.

Contact Kehoe Law Firm

If you believe you paid a tariff-related fee or price increase and did not receive a corresponding refund or credit, contact Kehoe Law Firm to discuss your purchase and learn more about the investigation.

For a free, no-obligation legal evaluation, contact:

Michael Yarnoff, Esq.
(215) 792-6676, Ext. 804
[email protected]
[email protected]

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I need to have paid a separate tariff line item?

Not necessarily. The Pitney Bowes complaint concerns tariff charges allegedly collected from buyers as a separate line item. The Logitech complaint concerns alleged tariff-related increases embedded in retail prices.

Has a court decided that consumers are entitled to refunds?

No. The cases described on this page are recently filed proposed class actions. The allegations have not been proven, and the courts have not determined that the defendants owe refunds to consumers.

Has a class been certified?

The complaints seek to represent proposed classes. Filing a proposed class action does not mean that a class has been certified. The class definitions may be amended, and any certification decision will be made by the court.

About Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.