Retailers vs. Trump: List of companies suing Trump admin over emergency tariffs

Costco in large quantities Corp. Has officially united a undulation of lawsuits against the ruff administration’s sweeping tariff orders, becoming the largest retailer yet to take legal action, CNBC reported.

The company filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade on November 28, 2025, seeking a full refund of duties it paid under tariffs imposed using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

Costco argued that its request for more time to finalise tariff calculations needed to preserve refund eligibility was denied by customs authorities. The company also stressed that IEEPA does not explicitly grant the President the power to impose tariffs.

It's a huge win for many small businesses and state-led groups, which have challenged the tariffs earlier. Costco's entry signifies that even large corporations feel vulnerable under the current policy.

Read more: Assessing impact of US tariffs on India’s agriculture sector

Costco has become one of the prominent companies joining the list of retailers and importers:

Revlon

Bumble Bee Foods

Kawasaki Motors

Ray-Ban parent EssilorLuxottica and,

Yokohama Tire

According to customs data and budget analyses, tariff collections surged in fiscal 2025, reaching record levels. Billions of dollars in tariff refunds are at stake, potentially.

Many retailers say the sudden surge in import duties disrupted supply chains, forced price hikes, and threatened their low-price retail model. Some tried to mitigate damage by consolidating suppliers, sourcing more domestically, or cutting discretionary items. However, the costs remain steep.

Read more: Canada to resume US trade talks when timing is right, says PM Mark Carney

The core legal question revolves around IEEPA, a 1977 law that grants presidential authority to restrict trade only under “unusual and extraordinary threats” and does not mention tariffs explicitly.

The Guardian reported that Costco said in the lawsuit cited the law and said, “IEEPA grants the president certain power, but they ‘may only be exercised to deal with an unusual and extraordinary threat with respect to which a national emergency has been declared for purposes of this chapter and may not be exercised for any other purposes’.”

In November, during hearings before the Supreme Court of the United States, justices, including conservative ones, appeared skeptical of the administration’s justification, raising concerns about the scope of presidential authority.

Even though lower courts have already ruled the tariffs illegal, customs continued collecting duties because courts stayed enforcement pending appeal. This has left importers struggling with the possibility that even if the tariffs are struck down, already-paid duties may not be refunded automatically.

The companies filed the lawsuit to preserve their right to claim refunds before “liquidation,” a customs process scheduled to wrap up mid-December. According to the lawsuit, if liquidation completes, the tariffs become final, and importers potentially lose refund rights under the standard procedure.

If there is a delay in ruling, the liquidation may lead to job cuts, price hikes, and disruptions in supply chains.

If the Supreme Court upholds the lower court verdict that the tariffs are unlawful and grants refund rights, importers could reclaim billions in duties.

That could lead to a substantial drop in prices of imported goods, benefiting consumers, and relieving enormous financial stress on businesses that operate on thin margins.

---

---