A Lowe’s class action seeks tariff refunds for shoppers who allegedly paid higher prices

On Sept. 3, 2026, Ohio resident James McCoy filed a class action lawsuit against Lowe’s Cos. Inc., alleging the retailer kept tariff refunds after passing those costs onto shoppers through higher prices.

The dispute over tariff costs

McCoy says he bought products for personal projects at Lowe’s and paid higher prices because the retailer passed along tariff costs on imported goods. The complaint does not identify his specific products, purchase prices or alleged overpayment.

Beginning in February 2025, President Donald Trump imposed import taxes under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Lowe’s paid those duties on goods it imported and raised some retail prices to recover part of the expense, the lawsuit alleges.

On Feb. 20, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled the IEEPA does not authorize presidential tariffs in Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump. The complaint cites a subsequent trade court order providing refunds to importers. The proposed class action claims Lowe’s would recover part of its tariff expense twice: first through higher customer prices and then through government refunds.

Lowe’s reportedly received $80 million in refunds

During Lowe’s Aug. 19 earnings call, chief financial officer Brandon Sink said the company recorded an $80 million tariff refund benefit in its fiscal second quarter. Higher fuel and transportation costs largely offset that benefit, he said.

Total refunds could reach $1 billion, the complaint estimates. The lawsuit claims Lowe’s plans to keep the money without establishing a process to repay shoppers for the costs they covered.

However, Sink said Lowe’s was pursuing additional refunds and expected to use future benefits for initiatives aimed at customers. He did not announce a process during those remarks to reimburse shoppers for past purchases.

The legal claims

The complaint brings three legal claims:

  • Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act: A state law prohibiting unfair or deceptive consumer sales practices. McCoy brings this claim on behalf of the proposed Ohio class.
  • Unjust enrichment: A claim that Lowe’s unfairly benefits at shoppers’ expense by keeping payments that covered costs the government later reimburses
  • Money had and received: An alternative claim seeking money McCoy maintains belongs to consumers who helped pay the tariffs

A fourth count requests court orders to preserve the refund money, disclose amounts Lowe’s received or expects to receive, and establish a consumer refund process. The lawsuit asks the court to require a separate account to hold the funds while the case proceeds.

What this means for Lowe’s shoppers

The lawsuit seeks to represent shoppers nationwide who bought goods subject to IEEPA tariffs from Lowe’s between Feb. 1, 2025, and Feb. 24, 2026, with a separate proposed class for Ohio shoppers. In-store and online purchases fall within those definitions, but purchases of goods outside the tariffs do not.

McCoy asks the court to require Lowe’s to repay the tariff costs customers allegedly covered through higher prices or distribute a proportionate share of its government refunds. As of this writing, there is no claims process or money available to shoppers.