The biggest video game makers don’t want to give you your loot back.
Then President Donald Trump strict tariffs imposed Last year, Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo all raised their prices under executive order and passed those higher costs on to their customers. At the time, the companies said the price increases were due to market conditions and the changing economic landscape.
Now, after the US Supreme Court ruled that Trump’s tariffs were illegalforcing the government to reimburse companies for the tariffs they paid, those same video game makers are now pleading in court that they don’t have to pass them on to their customers.
While big box retailers such as Walmart and Costco have said they plan to lower costs for consumers pressured by tariff-related price increases, the major video game makers have not gone that route.
Sony
Lawyers for Sony Interactive Entertainment sought to dismiss a class action lawsuit filed against the company in May. In the lawsuit, plaintiffs said Sony overcharged consumers for PlayStation consoles after the tariffs were imposed and then sought reimbursement from the U.S. government.
On Monday, Sony’s legal team dismissed these claims.
“They suffered no observable harm because they voluntarily paid the advertised prices for the consoles and got exactly what they paid for: working consoles,” the lawyers said.
They added that the plaintiffs “received the consoles they voluntarily purchased at the advertised prices.”
“Pricing decisions involve many factors – inflation, supply chain costs, currency fluctuations and demand – and plaintiffs do not plausibly allege that tariffs caused the console price increases.”
The company said it expects to receive about 80 billion yen – or $510 million – in tariff refunds across the Sony Group at a quarterly meeting in July.
Microsft
Xbox owner Microsoft also does not want to give consumers tariff refunds. In July, consumers said Microsoft had raised prices on Xbox consoles and other products in response to the tariffs and subsequently asked for refunds for tariffs, which they consider “unjust.” Microsoft tried to dismiss the class action lawsuit in late August.
“He paid for it, he received it, and he continues to use it. The plaintiff received the benefit of his bargain. But now he wants to go back and renegotiate the price he paid,” Microsoft’s lawyers said of the plaintiff. “He is not claiming that the Xbox does not work as he thought it would work, that Microsoft misrepresented the qualities of the Xbox, or that he paid the price for the Xbox only because he believed it was based on a tariff.”
Microsoft said there are several reasons why companies adjust prices.
“Companies set prices based on many factors, including component costs, overhead, competition and taxes – and those factors fluctuate over time,” the company said in its motion to dismiss. “Companies have no obligation to adjust those prices up or down day by day based on predictions that may or may not come true.”
The company has not publicly disclosed how much it expects to receive in fare refunds.
Nintendo
Nintendo started this trend when it wanted to dismiss a lawsuit over the reimbursement of consumer rates in July. Three months earlier, prosecutors said Nintendo of America had raised retail prices to offset the tariffs, requested reimbursement of tariffs and made no legally binding commitment to refund consumers.
In its motion to dismiss, Nintendo of America said the plaintiffs knew what they were getting into.
“Plaintiffs now assert that they are entitled to recover some or all of these refunds. Plaintiffs do not dispute that Nintendo’s price adjustments were lawful,” attorneys said. “Plaintiffs also do not allege that Nintendo violated any terms of sale or misled consumers. Rather, Plaintiffs admit that Nintendo informed the public in advance that tariffs were among the market conditions that determined the price.”
Nintendo said it was a $300 million tariff refund.
In its legal filing, Nintendo said it has adjusted prices in response to labor, shipping and memory costs, as well as tariffs.
