Lululemon Lawsuit: Shoppers Want the Tariff Money Back
Questions about this case?
AI Legal Assistant · free · answers in seconds · general information, not legal advice
The Lululemon lawsuit in the news is about tariffs. Two proposed class actions say Lululemon raised prices to cover import tariffs that the Supreme Court struck down on February 20, 2026 — and is keeping the refunds it now collects from the government. Lululemon itself reports receiving $134.5 million in tariff refunds in one quarter. If you bought from Lululemon in the U.S. between February 1, 2025 and February 24, 2026, you are probably inside the proposed class. There is no settlement, no claim form and no deadline.
Editorially Reviewed — Content reviewed for accuracy using published legal research, government data, and verified court records. See our methodology
Reviewed by Leonard Goldberg, Editor · Last updated
What the Tariff Lawsuits Say
Starting February 1, 2025, the federal government imposed tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA); by April 2025 they covered most U.S. trading partners. The majority of Lululemon's products are made in Vietnam, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and Bangladesh — Vietnam alone supplies about 40%, according to the complaint. The lawsuits allege that Lululemon passed the cost on: its chief financial officer announced “strategic price increases” in June 2025, and its chief executive told CNBC in September 2025 that tariffs would mean higher prices.
On February 20, 2026 the Supreme Court invalidated the IEEPA tariffs in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, and collection ended on February 24, 2026. Only the importer of record can claim that money back — shoppers who paid the higher shelf price have no refund route of their own. The complaints allege Lululemon is keeping both: the higher prices customers paid and the refunds it recovers. In its quarterly report, Lululemon says it paid $230 million in IEEPA tariffs in total and, in the quarter ended August 2, 2026, received $134.5 million in refunds plus $4.1 million in interest. The plaintiffs want the tariff-related overcharges returned to customers with interest, or a proportionate share of those refunds.
Case Details
Two separate federal cases make the same core claim.
Neuman v. Lululemon USA Inc., No. 2:26-cv-11029 — U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Judge Stephen J. Murphy III. Filed March 27, 2026, it was the first. It asserts equitable claims, chiefly unjust enrichment, for a nationwide class. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on September 15, 2026. Docket.
Alsaady v. Lululemon USA Inc., No. 3:26-cv-05708 — U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, filed June 30, 2026 by Hagens Berman in the district of Lululemon's U.S. headquarters in Sumner, Washington. It adds claims under the Washington and Michigan consumer protection acts and New York General Business Law § 349, with Michigan and New York subclasses. An amended complaint followed on August 27, 2026; the docket lists a motion to dismiss and a motion to stay filed on September 28, 2026. Docket.
Lululemon told investors it “intends to defend” both lawsuits.
Status: Two Tariff Class Actions, No Settlement
The other Lululemon cases, briefly:
Phantom discounts. A California shopper sued in Los Angeles Superior Court in July 2026, alleging she paid $59 for Wunder Train tights shown next to a struck-through $98 price that, per her complaint, Lululemon had not charged at any time since October 8, 2025. Courthouse News did not say whether it seeks class status, and we found no case number.
Forever chemicals. On April 13, 2026 the Texas Attorney General issued a Civil Investigative Demand to Lululemon USA Inc. to examine whether its apparel contains PFAS that customers would not expect from its wellness marketing. That is an investigation, not a lawsuit or a finding.
Investors. Patel v. Lululemon Athletica Inc., No. 1:24-cv-06033 (S.D.N.Y.), covers people who bought LULU shares or options between December 8, 2023 and July 24, 2024. On March 31, 2026 the court let part of it proceed; it is in discovery.
Costco. Lululemon's own suit against Costco over look-alike products (No. 2:25-cv-05864, C.D. Cal.) was dismissed with prejudice on August 12, 2026 after the two companies stipulated to end it. Shoppers were never parties.
Greenwashing. Gyani v. Lululemon USA Inc. (S.D. Fla.), a 2024 proposed class action that attached a Canadian greenwashing complaint, was dismissed without prejudice in February 2025.
Follow this case
There's no claim deadline yet. We'll email you if a settlement opens a claim period.
Who Is in the Proposed Tariff Class
Both complaints propose essentially the same class: anyone in the United States who bought Lululemon products subject to IEEPA tariffs between February 1, 2025 and February 24, 2026. The Michigan case covers purchases from “any Lululemon retail channel” — stores and online alike. The Washington case adds Michigan and New York subclasses.
There is nothing to join. If a class is certified or a settlement is reached, a court-approved notice goes out and an administrator handles claims. What is worth doing now is keeping proof: the order history in your Lululemon account, email receipts, store receipts and card statements from that window. If a claims process ever opens, documented purchases are the strongest claim — see how settlements without a receipt have worked.
What a Customer Could Get
Lululemon Tariff Lawsuit Timeline
- 1
February 1, 2025 — Tariffs Begin
The first IEEPA tariff orders are issued. By April 2025 they reach the countries where most Lululemon products are made. This date opens the proposed class period.
- 2
June–September 2025 — Price Increases Announced
Per the complaints, Lululemon's CFO announces “strategic price increases” in June 2025, and its CEO tells CNBC in September 2025 that tariffs mean higher prices.
- 3
February 20, 2026 — Supreme Court Strikes the Tariffs
Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump invalidates the IEEPA tariffs; collection ends February 24, 2026, closing the proposed class period. Lululemon had already sued the government on January 8, 2026 to get its tariffs back.
- 4
March 27, 2026 — First Consumer Class Action
Neuman v. Lululemon USA Inc. is filed in the Eastern District of Michigan, seeking the tariff overcharges for a nationwide class.
- 5
June 30, 2026 — Second Case in Washington
Alsaady v. Lululemon USA Inc. is filed in the federal district that includes Lululemon's U.S. headquarters, adding Washington, Michigan and New York consumer-protection claims.
- 6
September 2026 — Refunds Reported, Cases Contested
Lululemon reports $134.5 million in IEEPA refunds for its quarter ended August 2, 2026. The Michigan plaintiffs amend on September 15; the Washington docket lists a motion to dismiss on September 28. No settlement.
Three Things to Watch For
A widely reported refund figure plus millions of past customers is an easy setup for impostors:
“Claim your Lululemon tariff refund” pages
Neither tariff case has a claims process. A page asking for your card number, your Lululemon login or a “processing fee” to reserve a refund is not connected to any court.
Texts saying your refund is ready
The $134.5 million went to Lululemon as the importer, not to shoppers. A text or email saying your personal tariff refund is waiting and asking you to confirm payment details is phishing. A real class notice comes only after certification or a settlement, from a court-approved administrator.
“Lululemon PFAS lawsuit payout” ads
The PFAS matter officially announced is a Texas Attorney General investigation, and an investigation has no claim form for shoppers. Ads promising compensation for leggings you own are signing up clients for law firms, not paying claims — read any retainer before you sign it.
Lululemon Lawsuit — Questions People Actually Ask
What is the Lululemon lawsuit about?
The cases in the news in 2026 are two proposed consumer class actions over tariffs. They allege Lululemon raised prices to cover IEEPA tariffs, then kept the refunds after the Supreme Court struck those tariffs down on February 20, 2026. Separately there is a phantom-discount suit in California, a Texas PFAS investigation, an investor suit and a finished dispute with Costco.
Is there a Lululemon class action I can join?
You cannot sign up, and you do not need to. If you bought Lululemon products in the U.S. between February 1, 2025 and February 24, 2026 that were subject to IEEPA tariffs, you fall inside the class the plaintiffs propose. Whether that class is certified is up to the court. For cases paying now, see open class action settlements.
Is there a Lululemon settlement or claim form?
No. As of September 30, 2026 neither tariff case has settled and no court has certified a class. There is no administrator, no claim form and no deadline.
Did Lululemon really get tariff money back?
Yes, per its own filing. Lululemon's quarterly report, filed September 3, 2026, says it paid $230 million in IEEPA tariffs in total and, during the quarter ended August 2, 2026, received $134.5 million in refunds plus $4.1 million in interest. Whether customers are owed a share is the question in the lawsuits; Lululemon says it intends to defend them.
How much could I get?
No one can say yet. The suits seek the tariff-related part of what customers paid, not the full purchase price. Per-person amounts in consumer class actions depend on the fund, the number of claimants and proof of purchase — the class action payout calculator shows how those factors interact.
Is Lululemon being sued over PFAS in its leggings?
The PFAS matter officially announced is an investigation, not a class action: on April 13, 2026 the Texas Attorney General issued a Civil Investigative Demand to examine whether Lululemon apparel contains PFAS customers would not expect. It is not a finding of wrongdoing and pays shoppers nothing. For the wider forever-chemicals litigation, see our PFAS lawsuit update.
What happened with Lululemon and Costco?
Lululemon sued Costco in June 2025 over look-alike products (No. 2:25-cv-05864, C.D. Cal.). On August 11, 2026 the parties filed a stipulation of dismissal, and the court dismissed the case with prejudice the next day. It was a patent and trademark dispute between the two companies; customers are not part of it.
I bought Lululemon stock. Does the investor case cover me?
Patel v. Lululemon Athletica Inc., No. 1:24-cv-06033 in the Southern District of New York, covers people who bought LULU shares or options between December 8, 2023 and July 24, 2024. It alleges misleading statements about inventory allocation and the Breezethrough launch. On March 31, 2026 the court denied the motion to dismiss in part; the case is in discovery, with no settlement.
Separate from this case: were you injured in the last 2 years?
Class-action payouts are fixed amounts through an administrator. A personal injury claim is a different case — and often worth far more. Free estimate, no obligation.