IKEA class action alleges company passed on illegal tariff costs to consumers

IKEA class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Plaintiffs Patrick Terrill and Brenda Perez filed a class action lawsuit against IKEA North America Services LLC, IKEA US Retail LLC, IKEA Property Inc., IKEA Holding US Inc., INGKA Holding Overseas B.V. and INGKA Holding B.V.
• Why: Terrill and Perez claim IKEA unlawfully passed on costs associated with tariffs that were later determined to be illegal to consumers.
• Where: The IKEA class action lawsuit was filed in Pennsylvania federal court.

IKEA is facing a class action lawsuit alleging it unlawfully passed on tariff-related costs to consumers, even though those tariffs were later determined to be illegal.

Plaintiffs Patrick Terrill and Brenda Perez filed the class action complaint against IKEA on April 27 in Pennsylvania federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws.

According to the class action lawsuit, IKEA increased consumer prices due to unlawful tariffs levied by President Donald Trump pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

Specifically, IKEA allegedly transferred unlawful IEEPA tariff costs onto consumers, leading to inflated prices.

The class action lawsuit claims that the importer of record holds the legal right to seek reimbursement from the government for an unlawfully collected tariff. However, the importer frequently functions as little more than a financial conduit, advancing the tariff payment and recouping that payment by charging consumers higher prices, the plaintiffs say.

Thus, the consumer, in practical and economic terms, is the one who paid the illegal IEEPA tariffs, the plaintiffs allege.

Thousands of companies seeking refunds of illegal tariffs, lawsuit claims

The plaintiffs argue that American consumers who paid the unlawful tariffs have no statutory right of action before the Court of International Trade (CIT), as the right to seek a refund for unlawfully paid tariffs belongs to the importer of record, which is IKEA.

Accordingly, even though it is the consumer who paid the illegal tariffs, only the importer can collect a refund in the CIT, the plaintiffs say.

The class action lawsuit claims that thousands of companies have already filed actions with the CIT seeking recovery of the full amount of their IEEPA tariff obligations, and the CIT has already ordered that refunds (plus interest) be issued to entitled importers regardless of whether the companies filed a lawsuit with the CIT.

The plaintiffs claim that, while the IEEPA tariffs were in place, IKEA passed on the tariff burden to consumers in the form of higher prices.

“In the ensuing months, IKEA continued to increase prices on products to offset costs related to the illegal IEEPA tariffs,” the IKEA class action lawsuit says.

The plaintiffs want to represent all persons in the United States who purchased IKEA products at inflated prices charged by IKEA because of the unlawful IEEPA tariffs. They are demanding a jury trial and requesting declaratory and injunctive relief and an award of compensatory, statutory and punitive damages for themselves and all class members.

Meanwhile, athleisure brand Fabletics is facing a similar class action lawsuit alleging it illegally passed tariff costs onto customers.

What do you think of the claims made in this IKEA class action lawsuit? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiffs are represented by Jonathan Shub and Benjamin F. Johns of Shub, Johns & Holbrook LLP and Frederic S. Fox, Donald R. Hall, Hae Sung Nam, Aaron Schwartz and Laurence D. King of Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP.

The IKEA class action lawsuit is Terrill, et al. v. IKEA North America Services LLC, et al., Case No. 2:26-cv-02774, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Ghirardelli recalls powdered beverage mixes over Salmonella risk
• Abbott class action alleges FreeStyle Libre 2 glucose monitor is defective
• Carrier, Trane, Rheem among HVAC companies accused of price-fixing in class action
• Snapfish class action claims products were ‘always on sale’ at misleading discounts