CONNECT WITH US
Gaming

Gaming

Proposed class action lawsuit against Logitech demands money to be given back to customers after $61 million US tariff refund

PC Gamer logo

Published on

Add as a preferred source on Google
Proposed class action lawsuit against Logitech demands money to be given back to customers after $61 million US tariff refund

A proposed class action lawsuit against Logitech is attempting to recover funds that were allegedly "extracted from American consumers" as a result of the Trump administration's tariffs.

The complaint [PDF] is being led by a construction company, SJK Development, and a California resident, both of whom say they bought Logitech mice at higher, tariff-affected prices. It was filed with the US District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division last week (via Ars Technica).

"This case is an example of a large multinational corporation and its US subsidiary taking advantage of its customers who rely on the integrity of manufacturers to sell products to customers in good faith," the complaint alleges.

"[The defendant] refused to be honest with their customers by raising prices across their product catalog to allegedly account for costs due to tariffs and then failed to return tariff proceeds when the US Supreme Court declared those tariffs unlawful."

While Logitech did not publicly announce price hikes, the complaint makes mention of the company's executives discussing higher prices and profits in regards to offsetting tariffs in its subsequent earnings calls.

"The company’s CFO, Mr. Anversa, attributed the company’s expanded gross margins—up approximately 130 basis points year-over-year in the fourth quarter—in part to Logitech’s United States subsidiary’s pricing actions executed in April 2025." the filing says.

"Mr. Anversa stated that those pricing actions, together with favorable currency movements, more than offset tariffs and promotions."

The Trump administration's IEEPA tariffs were ruled against by the US Supreme Court in February of this year, after it found that the US president did not have the authority to impose them.


Source link

Disclaimer

We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We TheMorningPulse.fyi want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It's possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.