Ford A Ford owner in San Diego has given voice to a question many have asked since the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in February that the administration’s imposition of tariffs under the IEEPA was unconstitutional: Who actually deserves a refund? Those tariffs cost automakers (both foreign and domestic) a fortune. Corporations lined up left and right to sue the government immediately after the ruling came down, but given how much of the cost was ultimately borne by consumers, should it stop there? Jason Bullock doesn’t think so, and that’s why he’s suing Ford for his cut of the tariff refunds coming the automaker’s way. After the Supreme Court ruling, Ford expected to get $1.3 billion back from the Feds. Bullock bought a Mach-E in February, before the decision came down, the suit says, and he was forced to pay more than he would have otherwise as a result. His legal team’s argument is pretty simple. While Ford may have been the entity that cut a check to the U.S. government, at least part of the tariff burden fell on customers, who were forced to pay inflated prices for their vehicles. Accordingly, they should get a share of the refund—not all of it, mind you, but some. Otherwise, the suit argues, Ford is getting paid on both ends of the deal—by the customers who helped the company eat the rising costs in the first place, and then again by the government when they get a refund. The customer, meanwhile, gets zero. The tariff impacts were reflected in rising sticker prices and higher non-negotiable destination and freight charges. According to the Detroit News, Ford isn’t alone in being targeted by customer suits. Amazon, Costco, and Nike have all been hit with similar litigation. More automakers may be next.
+7 others
