Skechers class action lawsuit overview:
- Who: SM Merger/Arbitrage L.P. filed a class action lawsuit against Skechers U.S.A. Inc., its top executives and directors, 3G Capital and Greenhill & Co. LLC.
- Why: The plaintiff claims Skechers overstated tariff risks to justify an unfairly low buyout price for public shareholders.
- Where: The Skechers class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.
A new class action lawsuit accuses footwear company Skechers of overstating tariff risks to pressure investors into accepting an allegedly unfairly low price in its $9.4 billion take-private deal.
The lawsuit was filed on Oct. 21 by private investment fund SM Merger/Arbitrage on behalf of all shareholders similarly situated.
According to the class action lawsuit, 3G Capital paid public shareholders $63 per share in September 2025, $17 less than its February 2025 offer. Skechers CEO Robert Greenberg and company president Michael Greenberg allegedly received a $1 billion windfall from the deal and kept control of the company.
The complaint alleges 3G Capital later cut its original cash offer from $73 to $63 per share, citing U.S.-China tariffs. On April 24, 2025, Skechers withdrew its 2025 financial guidance, blaming global trade policies despite record first-quarter sales.
When the stock fell 5.35% the next day, executives told 3G Capital the tariffs were less serious than they appeared, Law360 reports.
“3G Capital was accordingly informed by the officer defendants that Skechers would be able to readily withstand any negative impact of the increased tariffs imposed on the U.S. and China,” the Skechers class action lawsuit says.
SM Merger/Arbitrage wants to represent a class of all sellers of Skechers Class A common stock from April 24, 2025, through Sept. 12, 2025, including those who exchanged their shares in the take-private deal.
Tariff lawsuit: Skechers hid internal views from shareholders
The tariff lawsuit claims Skechers’ August 2025 information statement to shareholders called tariffs a significant risk to its business.
However, the plaintiff argues the company left out that tariff risks could be offset with small price increases and that Skechers had already begun shifting its U.S. sourcing from China to Vietnam. Skechers’ lower prices also left it better positioned than its rivals to absorb the tariffs.
The complaint further claims executives lowered Skechers’ financial projections three times in four days after 3G Capital’s final offer so the $63 price would appear fair.
The plaintiff alleges violations of federal securities laws and demands a jury trial, seeking damages, interest and attorneys’ fees for the class.
In another case involving Skechers, a consumer is suing the brand over unsupported claims regarding the health and fitness benefits of its shoes.
What do you think of the allegations made in this tariff lawsuit? Let us know in the comments.
The plaintiff is represented by Marc M. Seltzer and Krysta Kauble Pachman of Susman Godfrey LLP and Vincent R. Cappucci, Robert N. Cappucci, Jonathan H. Beemer, Brendan J. Brodeur and Andrew J. Entwistle of Entwistle & Cappucci LLP.
The Skechers class action lawsuit is SM Merger/Arbitrage L.P. v. Skechers U.S.A. Inc., et al., Case No. 2:26-cv-12327, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
Harassing debt collector calls lawsuit investigation: Portfolio Recovery, Midland, LVNV, Transworld, CCS, I.C. System, Harris & Harris, Radius, NCB, Sequium
November 4, 2026 | Legal News
