Target Tariff Refund Class Action: Cavallaro v. Target and the Wave of Tariff Pass-Through Lawsuits

In 2025, the federal government imposed broad tariffs on imports under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Retailers paid those duties when goods entered the country, and many raised shelf prices.

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court held in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (No. 24-1287) that IEEPA does not authorize tariffs, opening the door for importers to seek refunds of the duties they paid from U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Cavallaro v. Target Corporation

The Target case, No. 7:26-cv-06165, was filed July 21, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. According to published summaries of the complaint, it claims Target raised prices in response to the tariffs, passing the cost to shoppers. If Target recovers tariff refunds from the government while keeping the higher prices shoppers already paid, the plaintiff says, Target would be collecting twice for one cost.

The complaint brings claims under New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350, plus unjust enrichment and "money had and received," a legal claim for money that in fairness belongs to someone else.

These are allegations. Target has not been found liable, and it is expected to contest the claims.

The Target case is at the earliest stage. As of September 2026, no class has been certified and no ruling has been issued. The usual next step in these cases is a motion to dismiss.

Target is not alone. Law firms tracking these filings count more than 100 consumer tariff class actions against companies across retail, apparel, autos, and consumer tech after the Supreme Court's ruling. Examples include suits against Amazon (Rittenhouse v. Amazon.com, Inc., E.D.N.Y., filed June 5, 2026), Five Below (Johns v. Five Below, Inc., E.D. Pa., filed July 16, 2026), and Lululemon (Alsaady v. Lululemon USA, Inc., W.D. Wash., filed June 30, 2026).

A July 2026 defense-side analysis noted that no court had yet ruled on the merits of a consumer tariff pass-through claim, so the first motion to dismiss rulings will shape every one of these cases, including Target's.

What happens next in the Target case

Target will answer the complaint, most likely with a motion to dismiss. Based on the arguments defendants have raised in similar cases, expect Target to argue that the complaint does not identify specific price increases caused by the tariffs, that allegations made "on information and belief" are not specific enough under federal pleading rules, and that any claim about double recovery is premature if Target has not received refunds. If the case survives, the parties would move to discovery, where the plaintiff could seek Target's pricing data and any refund filings, and then to a fight over whether a class can be certified. Other tariff cases filed earlier may produce the first rulings, and judges often look to those decisions. Many similar cases filed in different courts could also be coordinated or consolidated. Each of those steps typically takes months. Shoppers outside New York should watch for whether a nationwide class is proposed or whether separate suits are filed under other states' laws.

For how a case like this moves from filing to any payout, see how a class action lawsuit works and how long class actions take.

The reason these lawsuits exist is that the government refund system pays importers, not the people who bought the goods.

After the Supreme Court's ruling, proceedings in the U.S. Court of International Trade required Customs and Border Protection to build a refund process for all importers, not just those who had sued. According to CBP and court filings summarized by trade lawyers, about 330,000 importers paid or deposited an estimated $166 billion in IEEPA duties across more than 53 million entries.

CBP launched the first phase of its refund tool, called CAPE (Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries), on April 20, 2026, inside its Automated Commercial Environment portal. An importer of record, or its customs broker, files a declaration listing the entry numbers it paid duties on, and refunds are paid electronically. Later phases opened more types of entries.

A retailer like Target that imported goods directly can file for those refunds. A shopper who paid a higher shelf price cannot. That gap is the heart of every consumer tariff case: if the company gets the duties back and keeps the price increase, the plaintiffs say, the customer is the one left out.

Companies answer that they never promised to pass refunds along, that their prices reflect many costs besides tariffs. Whether that answer is enough is what the courts will decide.

It also matters which tariffs a product carried. The Supreme Court's ruling covered tariffs imposed under IEEPA only. Tariffs imposed under other laws, such as Section 232 duties on steel and aluminum, rest on separate authority and are not part of these refunds.

Nobody qualifies for money yet, because nothing has been won or settled. But the proposed class gives a sense of who could be covered:

• Shoppers who bought goods at Target while the IEEPA tariffs were in place, roughly February 2025 to February 2026.
• Because the claims rely on New York law, New York purchasers are the most likely core of any class. Courts often limit state law classes to that state's residents.
• Purchases of goods whose prices went up because of the tariffs, which the plaintiff will have to connect to Target's pricing.

You probably would not be covered for goods bought before the tariffs took effect, for purchases outside the class period, or for items resold for business purposes. The court will decide the exact class period and definition if it grants class certification.

You do not need to do anything now to preserve your place in a proposed class. If a class is certified or a settlement is reached, notice will go out, and any claims will be filed only on an official settlement website. Beware of sites asking for a fee to "join" a tariff refund lawsuit. Our guide on how to join a class action explains how this works.

No one can say yet. The complaint does not have to prove a dollar figure at this stage, and no settlement has set a per-person amount.

If the case succeeds, recovery would likely be tied to the tariff-related portion of what shoppers paid, which is hard to measure for any single item. That usually means small amounts per person unless someone bought expensive imported goods. The New York statutes in the complaint provide a floor: under New York General Business Law section 349(h), a person injured by a deceptive practice may recover actual damages or $50, whichever is greater, and a court may triple damages up to $1,000 for willful or knowing violations, plus reasonable attorneys' fees. Whether those statutory amounts can be recovered class wide is itself a contested question.

For a sense of how class settlements usually divide money, see how class action money is divided.

These lawsuits combine a new situation with old legal theories.

• Unjust enrichment and money had and received: equitable claims that a company should not keep money that, in fairness, belongs to someone else. The plaintiffs argue a retailer that recovers tariffs it already passed to customers is unjustly enriched.
• State consumer protection laws: in the Target case, New York General Business Law section 349 (deceptive acts) and section 350 (false advertising).
• Declaratory relief and an accounting: some complaints ask the court to require companies to disclose how much they recover.

Defendants have strong arguments. Defense lawyers point out that no statute requires a retailer to pass tariff refunds to shoppers, that prices move for many reasons besides tariffs, that it is hard to trace a tariff's effect product by product, and that shoppers may lack standing if a company has not yet received any refund. Only importers of record can request refunds from CBP, so shoppers have no direct refund route from the government.

A win for consumers is far from certain. Whether a class action is the right tool here will be tested in the first motions to dismiss.

• No claim deadline yet. There is no settlement.
• Statutes of limitations. Claims under New York General Business Law section 349 generally must be brought within three years, and unjust enrichment periods vary by state. A pending class action can pause the statute of limitations for members of the proposed class, but that protection has limits if the class is never certified.
• Tariff period. The purchases at issue fall within roughly February 2025 to February 2026, so records from that window are what matter.

1. Download your purchase history. Target Circle and the Target app keep records of many in-store and online purchases. Save a copy now.
2. Keep receipts for big-ticket items bought during 2025 and early 2026.
3. Do not pay anyone to register you for a tariff refund. Real class action claims are free.
4. Watch for official notice by email or mail if a class is certified or a settlement is reached. Keep your email address current in your Target account, since notices are often sent to the address a retailer has on file.
5. Note your state. If you live outside New York, a future settlement could still include you, but that depends on how the class is defined.

If you made large purchases and want to know whether you have a claim worth pursuing, independent attorneys who handle consumer pricing cases can review your situation. A free case review takes about two minutes. For other pricing claims, see our pages on fake sale pricing lawsuits and dollar store overcharges.