COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2023

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

COMMITMENTS

As of June 30, 2023 and December 31, 2022, approximately $5.6 billion and $4.9 billion, respectively, of unused credit was available to PayPal Credit account holders in the U.K. While this amount represents the total unused credit available, we have not experienced, and do not anticipate, that all our PayPal Credit account holders will access their entire available credit at any given point in time. In addition, the individual lines of credit that make up this unused credit are subject to periodic review and termination based on, among other things, account usage and customer creditworthiness.

LITIGATION AND REGULATORY MATTERS

Overview

We are involved in legal and regulatory proceedings on an ongoing basis. Certain of these proceedings are in early stages and may seek an indeterminate amount of damages or penalties or may require us to change or adopt certain business practices. If we believe that a loss arising from such matters is probable and can be reasonably estimated, we accrue the estimated liability in our financial statements at that time. If only a range of estimated losses can be determined, we accrue an amount within the range that, in our judgment, reflects the most likely outcome; if none of the estimates within that range is a better estimate than any other amount, we accrue the low end of the range. For those proceedings in which an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible but not probable, we have disclosed an estimate of the reasonably possible loss or range of losses or we have concluded that an estimate of the reasonably possible loss or range of losses arising directly from the proceeding (i.e., monetary damages or amounts paid in judgment or settlement) are not material. If we cannot estimate the probable or reasonably possible loss or range of losses arising from a legal proceeding, we have disclosed that fact. In assessing the materiality of a legal proceeding, we evaluate, among other factors, the amount of monetary damages claimed, as well as the potential impact of non-monetary remedies sought by plaintiffs (e.g., injunctive relief) that may require us to change our business practices in a manner that could have a material adverse impact on our business. With respect to the matters disclosed in this Note 13, we are unable to estimate the possible loss or range of losses that could potentially result from the application of such non-monetary remedies.

Amounts accrued for legal and regulatory proceedings for which we believe a loss is probable and reasonably estimable were not material as of June 30, 2023. Except as otherwise noted for the proceedings described in this Note 13, we have concluded, based on currently available information, that reasonably possible losses arising directly from the proceedings (i.e., monetary damages or amounts paid in judgment or settlement) in excess of our recorded accruals are also not material. Determining legal reserves or possible losses from such matters involves judgment and may not reflect the full range of uncertainties and unpredictable outcomes. We may be exposed to losses in excess of the amount recorded, and such amounts could be material. If any of our estimates and assumptions change or prove to have been incorrect, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

Regulatory proceedings

PayPal Australia Pty Limited (“PPAU”) self-reported a potential violation to the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (“AUSTRAC”) on May 22, 2019. This self-reported matter relates to PPAU incorrectly filing required international funds transfer instructions over a period of time under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (“AML/CTF Act”). On September 23, 2019, PPAU received a notice from AUSTRAC requiring that PPAU appoint an external auditor (a partner of a firm which is not our independent auditor) to review certain aspects of PPAU’s compliance with its obligations under the AML/CTF Act. The external auditor was appointed on November 1, 2019.

AUSTRAC had notified PPAU that its enforcement team was investigating the matters reported upon by the external auditor in its August 31, 2020 final report. As a resolution of this investigation, on March 17, 2023, AUSTRAC’s Chief Executive Officer accepted an enforceable undertaking from PPAU in relation to the self-reported issues.

The enforceable undertaking does not include a monetary penalty. The entry into and compliance with the enforceable undertaking will not require a change to our business practices in a manner that could result in a material loss, require significant management time, result in the diversion of significant operational resources, or otherwise adversely affect our business.

PPAU is required to deliver an Assurance Action Plan (“AAP”) under the enforceable undertaking to demonstrate that the governance and oversight arrangements following the remedial work completed by PPAU are sustainable and appropriate. The enforceable undertaking requires PPAU to appoint an external auditor. The external auditor was appointed on June 22, 2023 and will assess and report on the appropriateness, sustainability and efficacy of the actions to be taken under the AAP. The external auditor’s final report to PPAU and AUSTRAC is due on or before April 16, 2024. The successful completion of the enforceable undertaking is subject to AUSTRAC’s ultimate review and decision based on the external auditor’s final report. We cannot predict the outcome of the external auditor’s final report or AUSTRAC’s decision.

Any failure to comply with the enforceable undertaking could result in penalties or require us to change our business practices.

We have received Civil Investigative Demands (“CIDs”) from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) related to Venmo’s unauthorized funds transfers and collections processes, and related matters, including treatment of consumers who request payments but accidentally designate an unintended recipient. The CIDs request the production of documents and answers to written questions. We are cooperating with the CFPB in connection with these CIDs.

We have responded to subpoenas and requests for information from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Enforcement Division relating to whether the interchange rates paid to the bank that issues debit cards bearing our licensed brands were consistent with Regulation II of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and to the reporting of marketing fees earned from the PayPal-branded card programs (the “SEC Debit Card Program Matter”). We have been informed by the SEC that this matter has been formally closed without action.

In February 2022, we received a CID from the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) related to PayPal’s practices relating to commercial customers that submit charges on behalf of other merchants or sellers, and related activities. The CID requests the production of documents and answers to written questions. We are cooperating with the FTC in connection with this CID.

In January 2023, we received notice of an administrative proceeding and a related request for information from the German Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) related to terms in PayPal (Europe) S.à.r.l. et Cie, S.C.A.’s contractual terms with merchants in Germany prohibiting surcharging and requiring parity presentation of PayPal relative to other payment methods. We are cooperating with the FCO in connection with this proceeding.

Legal proceedings

On August 20, 2021, a putative securities class action captioned Kang v. PayPal Holdings, Inc., et al., Case No. 21-cv-06468, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (the “Kang Securities Action”). The Kang Securities Action asserts claims relating to our disclosure of a CID from the CFPB related to the marketing and use of PayPal Credit in connection with certain merchants that provide educational services and the SEC Debit Card Program Matter in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2021. The Kang Securities Action purports to be brought on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s stock between February 9, 2017 and July 28, 2021 (the “Class Period”), and asserts claims for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, and former Chief Financial Officer. The complaint alleges that certain public statements made by the Company during the Class Period were rendered materially false and misleading (which, allegedly, caused the Company’s stock to trade at artificially inflated prices) by the defendants’ failure to disclose that, among other things, PayPal’s business practices with respect to PayPal Credit and regarding interchange rates paid to its bank partner related to its bank-issued co-branded debit cards were non-compliant with applicable laws and/or regulations. The Kang Securities Action seeks unspecified compensatory damages on behalf of the putative class members. On November 2, 2021, the court appointed a Lead Plaintiff, and on January 25, 2022, the Lead Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. The amended complaint alleges a class period between April 27, 2016 and July 28, 2021 (the “Amended Class Period”), and in addition to the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, and former Chief Financial Officer, also names other Company executives as defendants. The amended complaint alleges that various statements made by the defendants during the Amended Class Period were rendered materially false and misleading, in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, by PayPal’s alleged violations of the 2015 consent order with the CFPB, federal consumer financial laws, and Regulation II. On August 8, 2022, the court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint in its entirety, and granted Lead Plaintiff’s request for leave to file a further amended complaint. On September 16, 2022, Lead Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (the “SAC”), which asserts the same claims against the same Defendants based on the same alleged conduct as the prior complaint. Defendants moved to dismiss the SAC on November 3, 2022. On April 27, 2023, the Court granted Defendants’ motion and dismissed the SAC in its entirety with prejudice. Plaintiffs’ deadline to file an appeal has passed and the matter is now closed.

On December 16, 2021 and January 19, 2022, two related putative shareholder derivative actions captioned Pang v. Daniel Schulman, et al., Case No. 21-cv-09720, and Lalor v. Daniel Schulman, et al., Case No. 22-cv-00370, respectively, were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (the “California Derivative Actions”), purportedly on behalf of the Company. On August 2, 2022, a related putative shareholder derivative action captioned Jefferson v. Daniel Schulman, et al., No. 2022-0684, was filed in the Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware (the “Delaware Derivative Action,” and collectively with the California Derivative Actions, the “Derivative Actions”), purportedly on behalf of the Company. The Derivative Actions are based on the same alleged facts and circumstances as the Kang Securities Action, and name certain of our officers, including our Chief Executive Officer and former Chief Financial Officer, and members of our Board of Directors, as defendants. The Derivative Actions allege claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, and violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), and seek to recover damages on behalf of the Company. On February 1, 2022, the court entered an order consolidating the two California Derivative Actions and staying them until all motions to dismiss in the Kang Securities Action are resolved. On June 29, 2023, following the final dismissal of the Kang Securities Action, the Court so-ordered a stipulation dismissing the California Derivative Actions, without prejudice.

On October 4, 2022, a putative securities class action captioned Defined Benefit Plan of the Mid-Jersey Trucking Industry and Teamsters Local 701 Pension and Annuity Fund v. PayPal Holdings, Inc., et al., Case No. 22-cv-5864, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. On January 11, 2023, the Court appointed Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec as lead plaintiff and renamed the action In re PayPal Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation (“PPH Securities Action”). On March 13, 2023, the lead plaintiff filed an amended and consolidated complaint. The PPH Securities Action asserts claims relating to our public statements with respect to net new active accounts (“NNA”) results and guidance, and the detection of illegitimately created accounts. The PPH Securities Action purports to be brought on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s stock between February 3, 2021 and February 1, 2022 (the “Class Period”), and asserts claims for alleged violations of Sections 10(b) of the Exchange Act against the Company, as well as its Chief Executive Officer, Chief Strategy, Growth and Data Officer, and former Chief Financial Officer (collectively, the “Individual Defendants,” and together with the Company, “Defendants”), and for alleged violations of Sections 20(a) and 20A of the Exchange Act against the Individual Defendants. The complaint alleges that certain public statements made by Defendants during the Class Period were rendered materially false and misleading (which, allegedly, caused the Company’s stock to trade at artificially inflated prices) by the Defendants’ failure to disclose that, among other things, the Company’s incentive campaigns were susceptible to fraud and led to the creation of illegitimate accounts, which allegedly affected the Company’s NNA results and guidance. The PPH Securities Action seeks unspecified compensatory damages on behalf of the putative class members.

On November 2, 2022, a putative shareholder derivative action captioned Shah v. Daniel Schulman, et al., Case No. 22-cv-1445, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (the “Shah Action”), purportedly on behalf of the Company. On April 4, 2023, a putative shareholder derivative action captioned Nelson v. Daniel Schulman, et. al., Case No. 23-cv-01913, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (the “Nelson Action”) purportedly on behalf of the Company. The Shah and Nelson Actions are based on the same alleged facts and circumstances as the PPH Securities Action, and name certain of our officers, including our Chief Executive Officer and former Chief Financial Officer, and members of our Board of Directors, as defendants. The Shah and Nelson Actions allege claims for breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, waste of corporate assets, gross mismanagement and violations of the Exchange Act, and seek to recover damages on behalf of the Company. The Shah and Nelson Actions have been stayed pending further developments in the PPH Securities Action.

On December 20, 2022, a civil lawsuit captioned State of Hawai‘i, by its Office of Consumer Protection, v. PayPal, Inc., and PayPal Holdings, Inc., Case No. 1CCV-22-0001610, was filed in the Circuit Court of the First Circuit of the State of Hawai‘i (the “Hawai‘i Action”). The Hawai‘i Action asserts claims for unfair and deceptive acts and practices under Hawai‘i Revised Statutes Sections 480-2(a) and 481A-3(a). Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief as well as unspecified penalties and other monetary relief. On July 14, 2023, the court denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint.

General matters

Other third parties have from time to time claimed, and others may claim in the future, that we have infringed their intellectual property rights. We are subject to patent disputes and expect that we will increasingly be subject to additional patent infringement claims involving various aspects of our business as our products and services continue to expand in scope and complexity. Such claims may be brought directly or indirectly against our companies and/or against our customers (who may be entitled to contractual indemnification under their contracts with us), and we are subject to increased exposure to such claims as a result of our acquisitions, particularly in cases where we are introducing new products or services in connection with such acquisitions. We have in the past been forced to litigate such claims, and we believe that additional lawsuits alleging such claims will be filed against us. Intellectual property claims, whether meritorious or not, are time-consuming and costly to defend and resolve, could require expensive changes in our methods of doing business, or could require us to enter into costly royalty or licensing agreements on unfavorable terms or make substantial payments to settle claims or to satisfy damages awarded by courts.

From time to time, we are involved in other disputes or regulatory inquiries that arise in the ordinary course of business, including suits by our customers (individually or as class actions) or regulators alleging, among other things, improper disclosure of our prices, rules, or policies, that our practices, prices, rules, policies, or customer/user agreements violate applicable law, or that we have acted unfairly or not acted in conformity with such prices, rules, policies, or agreements. In addition to these types of disputes and regulatory inquiries, our operations are also subject to regulatory and legal review and challenges that may reflect the increasing global regulatory focus to which the payments industry is subject and, when taken as a whole with other regulatory and legislative action, such actions could result in the imposition of costly new compliance burdens on our business and customers and may lead to increased costs and decreased transaction volume and revenue. Further, the number and significance of these disputes and inquiries are increasing as our business has grown and expanded in scale and scope, including the number of active accounts and payments transactions on our platform, the range and increasing complexity of the products and services that we offer, and our geographical operations. Any claims or regulatory actions against us, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming, result in costly litigation, settlement payments, damage awards (including statutory damages for certain causes of action in certain jurisdictions), fines, penalties, injunctive relief, or increased costs of doing business through adverse judgment or settlement, require us to change our business practices in expensive ways, require significant amounts of management time, result in the diversion of significant operational resources, or otherwise harm our business.

INDEMNIFICATION PROVISIONS

Our agreements with eBay governing our separation from eBay provide for specific indemnity and liability obligations for both eBay and us. Disputes between eBay and us have arisen and others may arise in the future, and an adverse outcome in such matters could materially and adversely impact our business, results of operations, and financial condition. In addition, the indemnity rights we have against eBay under the agreements may not be sufficient to protect us, and our indemnity obligations to eBay may be significant.

In the ordinary course of business, we include indemnification provisions in certain of our agreements with parties with whom we have commercial relationships. Under these contracts, we generally indemnify, hold harmless, and agree to reimburse the indemnified party for losses suffered or incurred by the indemnified party in connection with claims by any third party with respect to our domain names, trademarks, logos, and other branding elements to the extent that such marks are related to the subject agreement. We have provided an indemnity for other types of third-party claims, which may include indemnities related to intellectual property rights, confidentiality, willful misconduct, data privacy obligations, and certain breach of contract claims, among others. We have also provided an indemnity to our payments processors in the event of card association fines against the processor arising out of conduct by us or our customers. It is not possible to determine the maximum potential loss under these indemnification provisions due to our limited history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular situation.

PayPal has participated in the U.S. Government’s Paycheck Protection Program administered by the U.S. Small Business Administration. Loans made under this program are funded by an independent chartered financial institution that we partner with. We receive a fee for providing services in connection with these loans and retain operational and audit risk related to those activities. We have agreed, under certain circumstances, to indemnify the chartered financial institution and its assignee of a portion of these loans in connection with the services provided for loans made under this program.

To date, no significant costs have been incurred, either individually or collectively, in connection with our indemnification provisions.

OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS

As of June 30, 2023 and December 31, 2022, we had no off-balance sheet arrangements that have, or are reasonably likely to have, a current or future material effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures, or capital resources.

PROTECTION PROGRAMS

We provide merchants and consumers with protection programs for certain transactions completed on our payments platform. These programs are intended to protect both merchants and consumers from loss primarily due to fraud and counterparty performance. Our Purchase Protection Program provides protection to consumers for qualifying purchases by reimbursing the consumer for the full amount of the purchase if a purchased item does not arrive or does not match the seller’s description. Our Seller Protection Programs provide protection to merchants against claims that a transaction was not authorized by the buyer or claims that an item was not received by covering the seller for the full amount of the payment on eligible sales. These protection programs are considered assurance-type warranties under applicable accounting standards for which we estimate and record associated costs in transaction and credit losses during the period the payment transaction is completed.

At June 30, 2023 and December 31, 2022, the allowance for transaction losses was $58 million and $66 million, respectively. The allowance for negative customer balances was $288 million and $212 million at June 30, 2023 and December 31, 2022, respectively. The following table shows changes in the allowance for transaction losses and negative customer balances related to our protection programs for the three and six months ended June 30, 2023 and 2022:


	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2023		2022		2023		2022
	(in millions)
Beginning balance	$	318	$	319	$	278	$	355
Provision	286		380		586		702
Realized losses	(288)		(373)		(553)		(763)
Recoveries	30		52		35		84
Ending balance	$	346	$	378	$	346	$	378