Sony has asked a federal judge to dismiss a class action demanding that PlayStation 5 buyers get a share of the $508 million it expects to recover in tariff refunds, in a motion filed Monday and reported by Game File.

“Paying fair market price for voluntarily purchased consumer goods is not a legally cognizable injury in fact,” Sony’s lawyers wrote. They called the claim that tariffs caused the August 2025 price rise “speculative and illogical.” The firm pointed to inflation, currency moves, component costs, logistics, competition and demand as alternative explanations without providing a breakdown of the costs and factors that applied to its price increases, Game File reported.

PlayStation prices went up again in March, five weeks after the tariffs fell, taking the standard PS5 to $649.99 in the U.S. and lifting prices in the U.K., Europe and Japan too. Had tariffs driven the first increase, the motion reasons, Sony would have cut prices once they disappeared instead of raising them again.

The video game industry and tariffs

Microsoft filed a near-identical motion on August 21 in Washington federal court, against a suit brought by gamer Trevor Hastings. There is “nothing unjust about Plaintiff purchasing an Xbox at an advertised price,” its lawyers wrote, adding that no one can now calculate what share of the price was tariff. Microsoft is also pushing to move the case into arbitration.

Nintendo went first in late July, telling a court that it or its retailers set a price and consumers decided whether to pay it. It has booked $300 million in refunds. Panic, maker of the Playdate handheld, refunded the 19% tariff it had charged customers, so far the only gaming hardware manufacturer to do so.

The Supreme Court ruled in February, in Learning Resources v. Trump, that the emergency powers act does not authorize a president to impose tariffs. Sony had raised PS5 prices by $50 the previous August, citing a challenging economic environment, and told investors its tariff bill for the autumn quarter neared $200 million. Amorey Walker and Bryce Foster-Quarles sued on May 6, seeking reimbursement for U.S. buyers since August 1, 2025.

Sony’s view of what buyers are owed sits alongside its view of what they own. In the same California court three weeks ago, it argued that reasonable consumers already understand they do not own the digital games they buy. The company has separately patented “super-fungible” gaming tokens and is reported to be weighing a stablecoin for game payments.

No judge has ruled on the Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo motions.