If you shop at Costco and paid higher prices during the recent tariff era, two class action lawsuits argue you are owed money back — but as of mid-July 2026, no court has agreed, and Costco has stated flatly in court filings that it does not plan to issue direct refunds to customers. The litigation follows a February 2026 Supreme Court ruling that found certain Trump-era tariffs unlawful, opening the door for importers like Costco to recover duties they previously paid to the federal government. The plaintiffs’ theory is simple: if Costco passed tariff costs on to members at the checkout and then gets those tariffs refunded by the government, keeping both amounts would be unjust enrichment. The lead case was filed in March 2026 by Illinois resident Matthew Stockov in U.S. District Court in Chicago, where it is assigned to Judge Steven Seeger.
Stockov argues that consumers — not Costco — are the “true victims” of the tariff regime and deserve a share of any government refunds the retailer receives. A second suit, brought by four Costco members in Washington state, makes a similar demand on behalf of customers who paid tariff-inflated prices on imported products. The stakes are not trivial: roughly $166 billion is owed to importers overall, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection had already processed about $35.46 billion in refunds as of a sworn declaration filed May 12, 2026 in the U.S. Court of International Trade.
Table of Contents
- Why Do Costco Members Claim They Are Owed Tariff Refund Money?
- How the Supreme Court Ruling and the $166 Billion Refund Pool Set the Stage
- Costco’s Defense — No Refunds Issued, No Harm Done
- What Costco Shoppers Can Actually Do Right Now
- The Legal Hurdles That Could Sink These Cases
- The Washington State Lawsuit and Why Venue Matters
- How the Government Refund Process Actually Works for Importers
- Frequently Asked Questions
Why Do Costco Members Claim They Are Owed Tariff Refund Money?
The central legal theory in both lawsuits is unjust enrichment. The plaintiffs allege Costco benefits twice from the same tariffs: first when it raised checkout prices to pass import duties along to members, and second when the government refunds those duties to Costco after the Supreme Court’s February 2026 ruling invalidated them. Under that framing, the refund money traces back to customers’ wallets, and letting Costco keep it would reward the company for costs it never ultimately bore. Think of it like a landlord who raises rent to cover a new city tax, then gets the tax refunded after a court strikes it down — but keeps the higher rent payments anyway.
Tenants would argue the pass-through was only justified by a cost that no longer exists. That is essentially the argument Stockov makes in Chicago, and the four Washington plaintiffs echo it: customers absorbed the tariff burden in real time, so any recovery from the government should flow, at least in part, back to them. There is a counter-argument embedded in ordinary retail economics, though. Retailers set prices based on many factors — freight, labor, competition — and tariffs are rarely broken out as a line item on a receipt. Proving exactly how much of a rotisserie chicken’s or television’s price was “tariff” is one of the hardest evidentiary problems these cases will face.
How the Supreme Court Ruling and the $166 Billion Refund Pool Set the Stage
In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that certain Trump-era tariffs were unlawful. That decision transformed years of collected import duties into potential government liabilities, with roughly $166 billion owed back to importers. The refund machinery is already moving: a sworn declaration filed May 12, 2026 in the U.S. Court of International Trade stated that U.S. Customs and Border Protection had processed about $35.46 billion by that date.
Crucially, that refund process runs between the government and importers of record — companies like Costco — not consumers. There is no federal mechanism that sends tariff refunds to the shoppers who may have ultimately paid the cost through higher retail prices. That gap is exactly what the class actions try to fill through state-law unjust enrichment claims, and it is why coverage such as The Center Square’s reporting has described the litigation as highlighting holes in the $166 billion refund process. The warning for consumers is that this gap cuts both ways. Because no law requires retailers to pass refunds downstream, members have no automatic entitlement to anything. Unless a court orders otherwise or Costco changes course, the default outcome is that refunded duties stay with the company.
Costco’s Defense — No Refunds Issued, No Harm Done
Costco moved to dismiss Stockov’s lawsuit on May 18, 2026. Its core argument is ripeness: because no tariff refunds have actually been issued to Costco yet, the plaintiff has suffered no concrete harm, and courts cannot adjudicate an injury that may never materialize. In Costco’s telling, suing over the distribution of money the company has not received is premature by definition. The company has also been unusually candid about its intentions.
In court filings, Costco stated it does not plan to issue direct refunds to customers. CEO Ron Vachris said publicly that any tariff refunds the company receives would instead go toward lower prices and better value going forward — a benefit spread across all future shoppers rather than checks to past ones. Supermarket news summarized the position bluntly: Costco believes it owes customers nothing due to tariffs. That posture creates a concrete example of the dispute’s asymmetry. A member who paid tariff-inflated prices on imported goods in 2024 and 2025 but has since let their membership lapse would receive no benefit at all from “lower prices going forward,” while the refund attributable to their purchases stays in Costco’s coffers.
What Costco Shoppers Can Actually Do Right Now
For now, there is nothing to file and no claim form to submit. Both cases are proposed class actions in preliminary stages — no class has been certified, no settlement exists, and no ruling has issued on Costco’s motion to dismiss. Practically, affected members can keep records of major imported-goods purchases from the tariff period (receipts, order histories in a Costco.com account) in case a class is certified later and documentation matters for claims. The tradeoff worth understanding is direct refunds versus Costco’s promised alternative.
A court-ordered refund would deliver identifiable dollars to past purchasers but could take years and be reduced by attorneys’ fees and the difficulty of calculating individual damages. Costco’s approach — folding refunds into lower shelf prices — delivers value faster and without litigation costs, but it is diffuse, unverifiable by any individual shopper, and benefits future customers rather than the specific people who paid the inflated prices. Neither path guarantees any particular member sees a measurable amount. Consumers should also be wary of anyone claiming they can secure a “Costco tariff refund” for a fee. Because no settlement or claims process exists, any such solicitation is a red flag.
The Legal Hurdles That Could Sink These Cases
The ripeness argument is only the first obstacle. Even if the Chicago case survives the motion to dismiss, plaintiffs face the classic pass-through problem: demonstrating that specific price increases were caused by tariffs rather than general inflation, supply-chain costs, or ordinary pricing strategy. Courts have historically been skeptical of indirect-purchaser theories precisely because tracing a tax or duty through a retailer’s pricing is speculative. Class certification is another chokepoint.
📨 Get Free Mass Tort Guides Alerts
Free · No spam · Unsubscribe anytime
Costco sells thousands of imported products at prices that changed at different times for different reasons, and members bought different baskets of goods. Defendants routinely argue that such variation makes classwide damages impossible to calculate, and that argument has defeated many consumer class actions before trial. Timing compounds the problem: as of mid-July 2026, no ruling has issued, and oral arguments may not occur until late 2026 or early 2027. Members should not expect resolution — let alone money — on any near-term timeline.
The Washington State Lawsuit and Why Venue Matters
The second suit, filed by four Costco members in Washington state — Costco’s home turf, as KING 5 reported — seeks to recover funds for customers who paid tariff-inflated prices on imported products. Filing where Costco is headquartered can matter: Washington consumer-protection and unjust-enrichment law will govern claims there, and a home-state court may handle discovery into Costco’s pricing decisions and refund accounting differently than the federal court in Chicago.
Running two parallel class actions also creates the possibility of overlapping classes. If both cases advance, courts may need to coordinate or consolidate them to avoid Costco facing duplicate claims for the same refund dollars — a procedural wrinkle that can add months to already slow litigation.
How the Government Refund Process Actually Works for Importers
Tariff refunds flow through U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which reviews and reliquidates import entries after the Supreme Court’s ruling invalidated the underlying duties.
The scale is documented in litigation before the U.S. Court of International Trade: a sworn declaration filed May 12, 2026 put processed refunds at approximately $35.46 billion against the roughly $166 billion owed to importers overall — meaning less than a quarter of the total had moved by that date. Costco’s own refund, whenever it arrives, will be part of that pipeline, which is one reason the company can plausibly argue in court that the money at the center of the lawsuits does not yet exist in its accounts.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I file a claim for a Costco tariff refund right now?
No. Both cases are proposed class actions in preliminary stages. No class has been certified, no settlement exists, and there is no claim form.
Who filed the lawsuits against Costco?
Illinois resident Matthew Stockov filed in March 2026 in federal court in Chicago before Judge Steven Seeger, and four Costco members filed a separate suit in Washington state.
What is Costco’s response?
Costco moved to dismiss on May 18, 2026, arguing the claims aren’t ripe because no refunds have been issued. It says any refunds will fund lower prices going forward, not direct customer payments.
How much money is at stake overall?
Roughly $166 billion is owed to importers nationwide from the invalidated tariffs; CBP had processed about $35.46 billion as of May 12, 2026.
When will the case be decided?
No ruling had issued as of mid-July 2026, and oral arguments may not occur until late 2026 or early 2027.
You Might Also Like
- IKEA Tariff Refund Class Action Claims Shoppers Paid Prices Inflated by Unlawful Duties
- Tesla Quebec Heat Pump Class Action Claims Cold-Weather Failures Could Cost Up to $400 Million
- Abbott PediaSure Class Action Claims Children’s Nutrition Drinks Were Misleadingly Marketed