Nintendo Sues U.S. Government Over IEEPA Tariffs That Delayed Switch 2 Pre-Orders, Joins More Than 2,000 Companies Seeking Refunds
Nintendo of America filed suit in the U.S. Court of International Trade on March 6, seeking a refund with interest of duties paid under IEEPA tariffs the Supreme Court struck down in February, joining more than 2,000 corporate lawsuits that have overwhelmed federal refund systems.
Overview
Nintendo of America filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government on March 6 in the U.S. Court of International Trade, demanding a full refund with interest of tariffs paid under executive orders that the Supreme Court ruled unlawful two weeks earlier. The complaint names five federal defendants: the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Homeland Security, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and the Department of Commerce. Nintendo is one of more than 2,000 companies that have filed similar refund lawsuits since the Supreme Court’s decision, in what has become the largest wave of trade litigation in modern U.S. history.
The Supreme Court Ruling That Started It All
On February 20, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump holding that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion, which reasoned that while IEEPA permits the president to “regulate importation,” the statute contains no reference to tariffs or duties. The Court noted that Congress has consistently used explicit language when delegating tariff authority in other statutes, and that no president had previously read IEEPA as conferring such power. Justices Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Alito dissented, arguing the statute’s broad language does authorize tariffs.
The ruling invalidated tariffs imposed under IEEPA executive orders issued by President Trump in 2025, which had applied to goods imported from multiple countries. According to government filings, importers had paid approximately $129 billion in estimated duty deposits for entries covered by most of the IEEPA tariffs as of December 2025.
How the Tariffs Hit Nintendo
Nintendo’s exposure to the tariffs was significant. The company manufactures its consoles and accessories primarily in Vietnam and China, and the reciprocal tariffs announced on April 2, 2025, landed on the same day Nintendo officially revealed the Switch 2 console. The timing forced the company to delay U.S. pre-orders from the originally planned April 9 date to April 24 while it assessed the financial impact.
Nintendo managed to preserve the Switch 2’s $449.99 launch price by leaning on its Vietnam-based production, which avoided the steepest China-specific duties. But the company absorbed costs elsewhere: Joy-Con 2 controllers rose from $90 to $95 per pair, and the Pro Controller climbed from $79.99 to $84.99 before the June 5 launch. By August 2025, a 20 percent tariff on Vietnamese goods prompted Nintendo to raise the original Switch OLED model from $349.99 to $399.99 and the standard Switch from $299.99 to $339.99.
A Tidal Wave of Refund Litigation
Nintendo’s complaint is part of an unprecedented volume of trade refund cases. More than 2,000 lawsuits have been filed in the Court of International Trade since the February ruling, with plaintiffs including Costco, FedEx, L’Oréal, Dyson, Revlon, Bausch & Lomb, CVS, and Nissan North America. A coalition of 24 state attorneys general has also filed suit in the same court.
On March 4, CIT Judge Richard Eaton issued a refund order directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection to liquidate and reliquidate entries without IEEPA tariffs. Notably, the order applies to all importers, not only those that filed lawsuits, establishing a nationwide scope. Interest on the outstanding refunds is accruing at approximately $650 million per month.
Two days later, CBP told the court it was “not able to comply” with the immediate refund order, stating that its existing administrative procedures and technology were not suited to the unprecedented volume. The agency proposed building a new web-based refund system within 45 days.
What Happens Next
Nintendo’s lawsuit was automatically stayed on March 13 under a December 2025 order from the CIT that paused all unassigned IEEPA tariff cases pending the court’s determination of appropriate next steps. The stay means the case will not move forward until the broader procedural questions around refunds are resolved.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has explored alternative statutory avenues for tariff authority. The president imposed a 10 percent global tariff for 150 days under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which permits temporary tariffs to address balance-of-payments deficits. Multiple states have already challenged this approach, contending the statutory prerequisites have not been met.
The Supreme Court’s decision becomes final on March 17. Legal experts have noted that the Court has not granted rehearing in an argued case since 1965, making reversal effectively off the table. For Nintendo and thousands of other importers, the central question is no longer whether refunds are owed, but how quickly the government can process them.