A class action lawsuit filed against Nintendo is seeking to determine whether customers are entitled to refunds following the Supreme Court’s invalidation of Trump’s reciprocal tariff against Japan.
The lawsuit was filed in April 2026, roughly two months after the Supreme Court struck down the tariff, with plaintiffs arguing Nintendo should pass its government refund on to consumers.
The core argument from plaintiffs is that Nintendo would be unjustly and unfairly enriched by keeping both the tariff refund from the federal government and the additional profits generated by the original price increase.
Nintendo responded by filing a motion to dismiss, arguing that its customers received exactly what they paid for, making the unjust enrichment claim legally inapplicable.
The gaming giant also contends that the plaintiff failed to make a plausible argument that its enrichment was unjust, and that completed retail transactions cannot be reopened simply because later events reduced its costs.
From a basic, intuitive perspective, it would be unfair for a customer to pay higher prices due to a tariff which was later invalidated, though legal and other factors complicate the picture considerably.
Customs and Border Protection recognises Nintendo as the importer of record, meaning only Nintendo will receive the refund, with no requirement to pass it on to consumers or any other party.
Nintendo’s overall enrichment may also be lower than plaintiffs suggest, given the significant legal and consulting expenses likely incurred while monitoring the tariffs and pursuing its refund claim.
The company may also remain subject to Section 122 tariffs, which are still being collected, with no apparent tariff exclusions currently in place for video game consoles.
Plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment argument faces a further hurdle in that Nintendo played no role in enacting the tariffs, nor did it tell customers they would receive a refund if the Trump tariffs were invalidated.
Other factors, including skyrocketing RAM chip prices, could also have contributed to price increases, meaning the tariff may not have been the sole driver of higher costs passed on to consumers.
Despite the controversy over pricing, the Nintendo Switch 2 ended its first 12 months on sale as the second-fastest-selling hardware in U.S. history, underscoring the console’s remarkable commercial performance.
The outcome of the lawsuit could carry significant implications for how companies handle government tariff refunds when those tariffs are later struck down by the courts.