77
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by Deep@mander.xyz to c/technology@lemmy.world

Two gamers have filed a class action lawsuit against Nintendo, alleging that the company will be unjustly enriching itself with any refund it secures from the U.S. government over widespread tariffs last year that, among other things, hiked the prices of Nintendo hardware and accessories.

“Unless restrained by this Court, Nintendo stands to recover the same tariff payments twice—once from consumers through higher prices and again from the federal government through tariff refunds, including interest paid by the government on those funds,” the suit states.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FUCKING_CUNO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 month ago

What is the logic behind giving a company money for the tariffs? The costs were invariably passed to the consumer, so how does paying the company make any sense?

[-] i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca 25 points 1 month ago

The logic was “these companies ate the cost” and when confronted with the fact that prices went up and the costs had been passed on to consumers, the clarification they provided was “nuh uh”.

[-] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 month ago

and when confronted with the fact that prices went up and the costs had been passed on to consumers, the clarification they provided was “nuh uh”.

the argument is, when a price goes up, there will be fewer sales and therefore less revenue/profit

[-] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Which makes me want to say things that would get me banned for multiple reasons.

[-] SmokedBillionaire@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago
[-] Loco_Mex@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

You have now been banned from Lemmy.World

[-] BurgerBaron@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

MFW a zionist bans me, then my entire instance without a vote, then unbans the instance, then censors everyone who complains, then mods me, then unmods me, then bans me again, then unbans me, VIP, ban, unban, ban.

FoiywZFJ620rfS6.png

[-] danc4498@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This is America. You’re not a person unless you’re a corporation.

[-] suicidaleggroll@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

It didn't take long to go from "corporations are people" to "the only people that matter are corporations"

Is it expensive to file corporate taxes in the US? It really sounds like if everyone represented themselves as a corporation they would have more rights.

[-] forty2@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

If you're looking for a new rabbit hole to explore...theres an entire crowd of people who firmly believe that the government creates a corporate version of you when you're born, and that your name in CAPS on the birth certificate is evidence of this.

[-] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 2 points 1 month ago

There's also endless content of them confidently presenting these arguments to judges when they've broken laws and being immediately shut down by said judges.

[-] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The whole thing is a scam by Big Driver-Side-Front-Window to boost their sales.

[-] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

the birth certificate

Berth certificate, making us all boats and therefore subject to maritime law.

It sounds like a stupid joke because it is but also one of their things.

[-] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago

What is the logic behind giving a company money for the tariffs?

Well, the logic is the fact that the tariffs were illegal.

The honourable thing to do would be to pay that money back to the customers, but that would make the shareholders sad and grumpy, so it's never going to happen.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago

Because the company handled all the nonsense of importing on behalf of the end customer (also most intermediaries).

The youtube channel HowNot2 talked about this a bit since they somehow became a(n actually really good) climbing gear store. Because tariffs were changing so frequently (often multiple times a day), basically nobody could plan for them. So companies had to balance their in-country stock with anything they were going to buy in the next few months... or even days. And try to figure out what price they might be paying.

Some companies basically just charged the tariff rate on any given day... which is bullshit since they would have bulk purchased whatever they could while they were "low". Others would eat the cost because they didn't want to lose customers by increasing the price of a preordered item. And so forth.

And... people who got their aliexpress on can tell horror stories of getting a bill once things made it through customs.

So... it actually makes perfect sense for the companies that dealt with this bullshit to get reimbursed by the christofacists. I would hope they would "pass it on" to the customers as an act of good faith (even if it is just a free game or something) but... this is a case where the problem isn't the corporations: it is the government.

[-] artyom@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Because the companies are the ones that literally paid the tariffs and the gov doesn't have records of how that burden was distributed, and thus couldn't possibly enforce it.

In short, they're completely unprepared for this situation they put themselves in.

[-] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The companies paid the tarrif, they get the refund.

The fact that tariffs allowed some companies to demand more money, is related but not causal, some companies will have had to eat shit because the market wouldn't bare the increase.

I'd love for the lawsuit to succeed and it set the precedent that when governments issue refunds they can force companies to pass it on to the customer, but I think it's unlikely.

It's also complicated by the way pricing works.

If the tarrif is for $15 but the uncertainty allowed a company to increase prices by $20, how much should the customer be refunded?

And what if the tarrif was $15 but the market only allowed a $10 increase and the company ate shit on the other $5?

Now what if none of these numbers are set in stone and all of the numbers are guesswork? Should the government audit all companies that changed their prices?

[-] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They should not be allowed to price based on "uncertainty" - if the tariff increases by 15, the buyer should pay that much and no more. So, anyone who bought at the increased 20 dollar price should receive 5 back.

Of course they'll never do this.

[-] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

All pricing under capitalism is based on uncertainty.

What the market will bare isn't a known thing.

Side-note: this is why YIMBYs are dumb as fuck when they apply econ101 to rents.

[-] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Also what happens when the companies are forced to eat part of the tarrif, if the tarrif is 15, but that pushes the prices above the maximum profit point (units sold * per unit profit) then how much tarrif back should the customer get?

[-] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago

Fuck that. They should push back against the government.

[-] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

They did and they got the tarrifs refunded.

The issue is that with markets nothing is tightly coupled.

[-] LodeMike@lemmy.today -1 points 1 month ago

How do you prove a customer paid for a product and that this product paid a tarriff

[-] zikzak025@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Not that difficult, actually. The company pays a tariff on the specific product being imported, which would have been recorded. Customers who then buy those products should receive itemized receipts, either physically from a store or electronically via email when buying online. The receipt should also indicate a payment method that can likely be matched to a bank statement if needed.

Match the itemized receipt to the tariffs paid, there you go.

The harder part is directly linking the tariffs paid to the price the consumer paid. The tariffs were inconsistent and changed a few times, and we don't know if all price increases were caused directly by tariffs or if there were other factors as well. Moreover, some companies ate the cost in some cases, notably Nintendo, who chose not to increase the original pre-tariff price of the Switch 2, but did for Switch 1 and accessories for both systems. Nintendo will likely be refunded for all of those, but not all of that was a cost passed on to the consumer, so it's hard to figure out at that specific a level.

This lawsuit is definitely going nowhere, at any rate, so this is basically all just idle musing.

[-] LodeMike@lemmy.today 0 points 1 month ago

How do you verify if the receipt is real?

[-] Pika@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

If your company isn't keeping track of receipts for goods sold, the IRS is going to have an absolute field day with you about time they decide to audit the company.

[-] LodeMike@lemmy.today 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Okay so the U.S. government should have to interact with however many private companies with their own standard for storing data, and then handle contacting the consumer and figuring out how to get the refund?

The whole thing is bad. Having to give refunds directly to consumers is near impossible to implement in any reasonable way.

Edit: the biggest hurdle is by far scammers. The U.S. government has historically been terrible at sussing them out. No way anyone'll find a pile of receipts. Noooooo shot that could be a problem.

[-] zikzak025@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Matching payment method/date/cardholder name to bank statements. You can prove that you paid X amount of money to Y company on Z date, and the matching itemized receipt received from that company indicating that you bought A, B, and C products that may have been tariffed.

Harder to prove if you paid with cash or gift card. Doable, but probably more trouble than it's worth to effectively collect pocket change after lawyer fees take their cut from the class action settlement.

[-] velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 1 month ago

The companies are the ones who paid the tariffs directly and then passed the cost onto their customers.

this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2026
77 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

84891 readers
1022 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS