Share and Follow
NEW YORK (AP) — In recent developments, at least two retail customers have initiated proposed class-action lawsuits in U.S. courts. They are targeting companies that previously sought to recover costs from import taxes, which the U.S. Supreme Court determined were imposed by President Donald Trump without legitimate legal authority.
These legal actions have been filed against FedEx, a leading delivery company, and EssilorLuxottica, a French eyewear firm known for producing Ray-Ban sunglasses. The aim is to ensure that consumers benefit from any tariff refunds these companies may receive. Over 1,000 businesses, including major names like Revlon and Costco, have lodged suits in the U.S. Court of International Trade to secure their rights to refunds.
On February 20, the Supreme Court nullified tariffs enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which represented a financial scope between $130 billion and $175 billion.
In the upcoming period, a refund process will be established either through the U.S. Court of International Trade or U.S. Customs and Border Protection as numerous lawsuits and claims make their way through the legal channels. Many companies are filing lawsuits proactively to safeguard their potential refunds.
FedEx announced in a Thursday statement that it intends to return any tariff refunds to its shippers and customers who bore the costs. However, a lawsuit filed against FedEx by Miami resident Matthew Reiser on Friday argues that the company’s promise “creates no legally enforceable obligation and is expressly contingent on future government and court guidance, which may never occur.”
Reiser claims he paid $36 in tariffs and customs brokerage and duty advancement fees on tennis shoes shipped via FedEx by Tennis Warehouse Europe, an online retailer based in Schutterwald, Germany.
FedEx did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In a separate proposed class action filed this week, Nathan Ward of New York states that he purchased Ray-Ban sunglasses from ray-ban.com in August 2025 that were priced higher than in the past, reflecting a tariff surcharge.
“Despite seeking an order entitling it to a refund of the duties collected as a result of the subject tariffs, EssilorLuxottica continues to collect and has not refunded the tariff surcharges it collected from consumers,” the complaint states.
EssilorLuxottica also did not respond to a request for comment.
Barry Appleton, co-director of the Center for International Law at New York Law School, said he expected many more such consumer lawsuits to surface, especially against companies that issued invoices or receipts with itemized tariff charges. The legal viability of the cases is not clear-cut but they put pressure on businesses to share any tax refunds they manage to secure, he said.
“What we are watching is the predictable next chapter of the IEEPA story,” Appleton said. “The Supreme Court told the White House it overreached, the major importers lined up for refunds, and now ordinary consumers are asking the obvious question — if those duties were illegal, why shouldn’t we get our money back too?”