Costco Wholesale Corp. has moved to protect itself from potentially significant financial exposure, joining a growing wave of companies filing legal challenges tied to President Donald Trump’s global tariff regime. As the Supreme Court deliberates on the legality of the administration’s expansive use of emergency economic powers, major retailers and manufacturers are racing to preserve their eligibility for refunds should the court strike down the policy. Costco’s decision to enter the legal arena highlights how deeply the tariff uncertainty is rippling through corporate planning, pricing strategies and supply-chain operations across the US retail sector.

Corporate America Mobilizes as the Tariff Outlook Turns Uncertain

While smaller import-dependent businesses and several Democratic-led states spearheaded earlier challenges, the arrival of household names such as Costco, Revlon and Kawasaki marks a notable escalation. The surge of filings reflects mounting concern that companies may lose access to refunds if they wait until after the Supreme Court rules. Costco’s Nov. 28 complaint argues precisely that point, citing Customs and Border Protection’s refusal to extend key tariff-determination deadlines—an outcome the company says threatens its ability to recover potentially significant duty payments.

The filing underscores a intensifying risk-management posture among large retailers. Tariffs have been one of the major wildcards shaping inventories, supplier relationships and pricing decisions throughout 2025. While many companies benefitted from exemptions or negotiated rate adjustments earlier in the year, the underlying uncertainty forced retailers to take more aggressive actions, from shifting supply routes to accelerating shipments to redesigning product assortments altogether.

A Retail Giant Adjusts Strategy as Costs Mount

Costco’s operations provide a clear window into how deeply tariffs have reshaped corporate behavior. The company has rerouted goods to non-US markets, consolidated its supplier base, and accelerated purchasing cycles to bypass peak tariff windows. These shifts were intended to shield customers from significant price increases—particularly across essential goods—while allowing Costco to preserve its reputation for pricing discipline. Flowers, for example, became more expensive for customers this year, while bananas and pineapples remained stable as the company absorbed more of the cost burden.

The retailer’s limited SKU count provides a competitive advantage, enabling Costco to negotiate better terms and manage cost pressures more effectively than larger, more inventory-diverse rivals. However, even Costco acknowledges that forecasting remains difficult. With tariffs applying disproportionately to non-food categories—such as electronics, home goods and apparel—margin compression remains an ongoing risk, especially if the Supreme Court ultimately upholds Trump’s tariff authority.

A High-Stakes Supreme Court Decision Looms

The legal uncertainty revolves around the administration’s reliance on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a law traditionally used for targeted sanctions rather than broad trade measures. Several Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical during oral arguments on Nov. 5, suggesting the administration may face an uphill battle. Still, lower courts allowed the tariffs to remain in effect pending a final decision, giving companies like Costco little choice but to file preemptively.

A ruling against the administration could reshape billions of dollars in trade relationships and ignite a flood of refund claims, rewarding firms that moved early to preserve their rights. A decision upholding the tariffs, meanwhile, could harden the policy framework underpinning the administration’s broader trade strategy, emboldening further tariff expansions and heightening the operational challenges facing import-reliant businesses.