Nintendo says users voluntarily paid higher prices, have no right to tariff refunds
Nintendo urged a court to dismiss a lawsuit demanding that it pass tariff refunds on to customers, saying that people who bought a Switch console or other products have no legal right to refunds that Nintendo is due to receive from the government.Nintendo said in a motion to dismiss yesterday that plaintiffs are “ask[ing] this Court to invent a legal duty out of whole cloth to retroactively re-price completed sales simply because the legal landscape has changed.” Nintendo said the plaintiffs “have no legal entitlement to the tariff refunds Nintendo stands to receive.”
The lawsuit was filed in April by two customers who seek to represent a class of all US residents who bought Nintendo products from February 2025 to February 2026. California resident Gregory Hoffert and Washington resident Prashant Sharan filed the class action complaint in US District Court for the Western District of Washington, alleging unjust enrichment and a violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act’s prohibition on unfair or deceptive acts.
“Nintendo engaged in unfair acts by: (i) raising prices due to tariffs; (ii) failing to disclose that it intended to seek tariff refunds; and (iii) retaining tariff refunds despite having passed the costs to its customers,” the lawsuit alleged. In their unjust-enrichment claim, plaintiffs said Nintendo profits were “unjustly obtained as a result of its price increases on goods subject to unlawful tariffs.” Nintendo raised prices for the original Switch console by $30 to $50 and added $5 to $10 to the prices of various Switch 2 accessories.
Nintendo told the court that “the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply when a party voluntarily pays a purchase price and receives a product in return.” Nintendo said plaintiffs “received exactly what they paid for: Nintendo products that Plaintiffs knowingly and voluntarily purchased at the advertised price. Nor is there anything ‘unjust’ about Nintendo retaining money that it may receive from the government as tariff refunds. The fact that Nintendo stands to receive tariff refunds does not give Plaintiffs any legal entitlement to those funds.”
Nintendo says users voluntarily paid higher prices, have no right to tariff refunds
Nintendo says Switch buyers got what they paid for, urges court to dismiss lawsuit.Jon Brodkin (Ars Technica)
like this
aramis87, Lasslinthar, TVA and dandi8 like this.
CompactFlax
in reply to Powderhorn • • •ZeroGravitas
in reply to Powderhorn • • •How is this news? Gas companies have been doing it for at least 60 years. Oil price goes up? Prices go up at midnight. Oil price goes down? You see, friend, this gasoline was made with the expensive oil, there's a certain lag in the supply chain that we need to account for etc. etc.
Pure capitalism knows just one correct price, and that's the price that the market will bear. Combine it with a monopoly and sky's the limit.
like this
TVA likes this.
Snot Flickerman
in reply to ZeroGravitas • • •Unpopular Opinion: If you bought a game console when prices were exploding you aren't really in a position to argue real financial harm because... its a fucking video game console. It's not housing, food, or some other major need.
Out of all the companies who will argue this, I honestly think the media companies have the largest leg to stand on because why are people just eating the cost increase of something that isn't a need if they financially "can't afford it."
Also this isn't a Trump "screw up." The money landing in the pockets of the companies who donated to his campaign was the end goal from the beginning.
How do I know? Because a judge allowed the tariffs to go in while it was determined if they were legal or not and part of the reason the judge agreed was the Trump admin lawyers promising it would all be paid back to consimers if they lost. They never had any intent.
professor_prime
in reply to Snot Flickerman • • •XLE
in reply to Powderhorn • • •Is there any type of purchase where this isn't the case? You could say the same thing about food.
CerebralHawks
in reply to Powderhorn • • •I'm no lawyer, but it sounds like they're kind of right? It's a case of "you're right but you're still an arsehole."
However, I think if Nintendo isn't going to refund consumers, they have no business seeking refunds from the government.
I never really thought the lawsuit against Nintendo had much merit. If costs go up, so too must prices, and demand goes down. People who support the price increases and continue to buy at the jacked-up prices are sending the message that price has not affected (their) demand. I do not believe they should be made whole because they are not out anything. They saw the price and they chose to pay it. Like everyone who buys a Steam Deck post-increase, or Xbox, or PlayStation. The Steam Machine was always gonna cost about $1000, that's been expected since it announced, and it hasn't increased in price (AFAIK).
But, again, not a lawyer.
However, I do firmly believe that if Nintendo is not going to make consumers whole, it similarly does not deserve to get made whole. For the same reason. Those tariffs were the cost of doing busine
... Show more...I'm no lawyer, but it sounds like they're kind of right? It's a case of "you're right but you're still an arsehole."
However, I think if Nintendo isn't going to refund consumers, they have no business seeking refunds from the government.
I never really thought the lawsuit against Nintendo had much merit. If costs go up, so too must prices, and demand goes down. People who support the price increases and continue to buy at the jacked-up prices are sending the message that price has not affected (their) demand. I do not believe they should be made whole because they are not out anything. They saw the price and they chose to pay it. Like everyone who buys a Steam Deck post-increase, or Xbox, or PlayStation. The Steam Machine was always gonna cost about $1000, that's been expected since it announced, and it hasn't increased in price (AFAIK).
But, again, not a lawyer.
However, I do firmly believe that if Nintendo is not going to make consumers whole, it similarly does not deserve to get made whole. For the same reason. Those tariffs were the cost of doing business. And they chose to do that business, and they did so... by raising prices. So it seems if you can't have one increase without the other... you can't have one refund... without the other.
like this
Quantumantics likes this.
cheers_queers
in reply to CerebralHawks • • •CerebralHawks
in reply to cheers_queers • • •Midnitte
in reply to CerebralHawks • • •Except that the tariffs that were placed on Nintendo's products were ruled unlawful and refunded (to Nintendo).
Imagine that it was found a city tax was calculated incorrectly - you'd expect a restaurant to refund customers, not keep the extra sales tax for themselves.
like this
TVA likes this.
artyom
in reply to CerebralHawks • • •like this
TVA and chameleon like this.
laranis
in reply to Powderhorn • • •Isn't Nintendo the company who gained notoriety for having a 50-year strategy? It was hailed as promoting long term vision over short term profits and focused on creating intergenerational fanbases and lifelong brand loyalty.
What part of that involves shooting your customers in the dick?
Legally, they're probably in the right. But imagine being the one gaming company that issues tariff refunds and continues to create physical games that emphasize quality gameplay and rich storytelling with optional but engaging couch co-op multiplayer that brings people together over technology instead of tearing them apart.
Guess not if it would impact Q3 2026.
JillyB
in reply to laranis • • •-smash competitor
https://aussie.zone/u/NigelFrobisher
in reply to Powderhorn • • •like this
TVA likes this.
bl4kers
in reply to Powderhorn • • •reksas
in reply to bl4kers • • •ㄖㄨㄖㄙ祂
in reply to bl4kers • • •professor_prime
in reply to bl4kers • • •Nintendo fans are some of the most braindead consumers in the world.
They're right down there with disney fans.
Excel
in reply to Powderhorn • • •This entire situation is just pure MAGA PR BS. Trying to pass these refunds back to consumers is extremely impractical, bordering on logistically impossible, and managing it would certainly cost more money than the amount of the actual refund.
They knew these tariffs would be passed on to consumers when they created them in the first place. In both cases, it's Trump trying to deflect the blame onto these companies for a situation that he created.
like this
TVA and chameleon like this.
InevitableList
in reply to Excel • • •Smoke
in reply to Excel • • •Setting up an online portal for customers to submit their order numbers and receipts is logistically impossible?
Megaman_EXE
in reply to Powderhorn • • •PabloSexcrowbar
in reply to Powderhorn • • •like this
0x1C3B00DA likes this.
ɔiƚoxɘup
in reply to Powderhorn • • •What a terrible take from a terrible company.
No more Nintendo, PS, MS, or games you don't own, looks like GOG is the only game in town, pun intended.
HerbGrower
in reply to ɔiƚoxɘup • • •ɔiƚoxɘup
in reply to HerbGrower • • •Dookieman12
in reply to ɔiƚoxɘup • • •ɔiƚoxɘup
in reply to Dookieman12 • • •Orly? I thought they had the same basic model as Playstation and that the steam software was required to play games.
TIL. Thanks stranger!
SocialistVibes01
in reply to Powderhorn • • •ㄖㄨㄖㄙ祂
in reply to SocialistVibes01 • • •Dookieman12
in reply to Powderhorn • • •like this
deliriousdreams likes this.
danielfm123
in reply to Powderhorn • • •like this
deliriousdreams likes this.