Google Wallet to Drop PayPal Support in the US Starting June 13
Google Wallet users in the United States will soon lose the ability to pay with PayPal. Starting June 13, 2025, Google will officially end support for PayPal as a linked payment option within its Wallet app, marking the end of an integration that's been in place since 2017.
The update was quietly confirmed through a Google Help Center page, as spotted by Android Authority. As of April 11, 2025, users can no longer add new PayPal accounts to Google Wallet. Any existing PayPal accounts linked to Wallet will be automatically removed on June 13.
For users who've relied on PayPal as a convenient way to manage payments through Google Wallet, this change will require a bit of housekeeping. Google is advising affected users to manually add another form of payment—such as a credit card, debit card, or bank account—to continue using Wallet services smoothly.
Recurring payments that were set up using a PayPal-linked Google Wallet account will also be disrupted. Google recommends updating payment details directly on the respective merchant websites to avoid service interruptions. Additionally, PayPal transaction history will no longer be viewable within Google Wallet, so users will need to log in to the PayPal app or website for account activity.
However, there's a small exception. If you use a PayPal-branded debit card, you're in the clear—these cards will still be accepted through Google Wallet even after the cutoff date.
The shift seems to be part of broader changes on both ends. Google says it's focused on offering more streamlined and rewarding payment options, while PayPal continues to evolve its own platform. In fact, PayPal is rolling out new features, such as tap-to-pay functionality for iPhones in Germany and group money pooling tools, reinforcing its commitment to flexibility and innovation in the digital payments space.
For now, users in Germany will retain the PayPal integration with Google Wallet. There's no official word yet from PayPal regarding the discontinuation in the U.S., but affected users should expect further communication directly from the company.
As the digital wallet landscape continues to shift, users are encouraged to review their payment settings to ensure uninterrupted service.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
3 hours ago
- India.com
Elon Musk once gave Apple 3 days to accept his Rs 55000 crore offer, Tim Cook rejected it, paid heavy price due to...
(File) Elon Musk, the world's richest man is infamous for aggressive business tactics, and one such example was none other than Apple, when Musk reportedly issued a 3-day ultimatum to the tech giant to accept his SpaceX satellite connectivity deal for a whopping $5 billion, days ahead of the iPhone 14 launch. When Elon Musk gave an ultimatum to Tim Cook According to reports, Elon Musk's SpaceX offered satellite connectivity for the iPhone, but Apple would have to pay $5 billion upfront for the service, and $1 billion annually after an 18-month exclusivity period. The egotistic billionaire was convinced that Apple wouldn't dare turn down such a deal, and gave Tim Cook 3 days to decide. Musk also threatened to launch a competing service that would work directly with iPhones if Apple refused his offer. Tim Cook defies Elon Musk However, unfazed by Musk's ultimatum and threats, Apple CEO Tim Cook turned down the offer and chose to partner with a smaller satellite communications provider (satcom), and even though the SpaceX deal would have provided more expansive satellite network for the iPhone, Cook decided otherwise due to various factors. Scorned by the refusal, Elon Musk did exactly what he had threatened to do; the tech billionaire launched Starlink Direct to Cell, a competing satellite service that offered satellite-powered communication for smartphones, including the iPhone running a T-Mobile network. The service was a collaboration between SpaceX and T-Mobile. Musk sues Globalstar in spectrum battle The situation presented a major legal challenge to Apple as iPhones using a T-Mobile network, could connect to Musk's Starlink Direct to Cell services, even though the devices were legally tied to Globalstar. The legal battle escalated after SpaceX challenged Globalstar's rights to an important wireless spectrum, claiming that the latter had failed to fully utilize the allocated spectrum, and was trying to block competitors from entering the market. This directly impacted Apple as the spectrum being challenged was being used for its iPhone satellite connectivity service, which meant that it would have to find an alternative satcom provider, if SpaceX were to win the lawsuit. SpaceX legal challenge triggers internal rift at Apple As per a report by Apple Insider, Musk's legal onslaught created internal rifts within Apple as senior executives, including its software chief Craig Federighi, and Adrian Perica, head of corporate development, expressed concerns over the tech giant's partnership with Globalstar, which reportedly has an outdated and slower network compared to its competitors like SpaceX. Globalstar was planning to expand its satellite network, but only marginal improvements were expected over the next decade. Many Apple executives feared that the company's reliance on Globalstar could draw unwanted regulatory attention, particularly over the issue of whether Apple could be classified as a telecommunications carrier. However, despite these reservations, Apple decided to continue its partnership with Globalstar, and has a $1.7 billion investment with the satcom provider, out of which $1.1 billion is dedicated to developing and launching new satellites.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
AI-driven search ad spending set to surge to $26 billion by 2029, data shows
Spending on AI-powered search advertising is poised to surge to nearly $26 billion by 2029 from just over $1 billion this year in the U.S., driven by rapid adoption of the technology and more sophisticated user targeting, data from Emarketer showed on Wednesday. Companies that rely on traditional keyword-based search ads could experience revenue declines due to the growing popularity of AI search ads, which offer greater convenience and engagement for users, according to the research firm. Search giants such as Alphabet-owned Google and Microsoft's Bing have added AI capabilities to better compete with chatbots such as OpenAI's ChatGPT and Perplexity AI, which provide users with direct information without requiring to click through multiple results. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Doutora: Truque caseiro para pescoço de peru (Tente isso hoje à noite) Revista & Saúde Saiba Mais Undo Apple is exploring the integration of AI-driven search capabilities into its Safari browser, potentially moving away from its longstanding partnership with Google. The report has come as concerns grew about users increasingly turning to the chatbots for conversational search and AI-powered search results could upend business models of some companies. Live Events Online education firm Chegg said in May that it would lay off about 248 employees as it looks to cut costs and streamline operations because students are using AI-powered tools including ChatGPT over traditional edtech platforms. Discover the stories of your interest Blockchain 5 Stories Cyber-safety 7 Stories Fintech 9 Stories E-comm 9 Stories ML 8 Stories Edtech 6 Stories "Publishers and other sites are feeling the pain from AI search. As they lose out on traffic, we're seeing publishers lean into subscriptions and paid AI licensing deals to bolster revenue," Emarketer analyst Minda Smiley said. AI search ad spending is expected to constitute nearly 1% of total search ad spending this year and 13.6% by 2029 in the U.S., according to Emarketer. Sectors such as financial services, technology, telecom, and healthcare are embracing AI as they are seeing clear advantages in using the technology to enhance their ad strategies, while the retail industry's adoption is slow, the report said. Google recently announced the expansion of its AI-powered search capabilities into the consumer packaged goods sector through enhancements in Google Shopping.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Google takes a gamble in class action jury trial over cell phone data use
The plaintiffs in court papers say that even when their phones are turned off, Google causes Android devices to surreptitiously send information over cellular networks "for Google's own purposes," including targeted digital advertising. These transfers improperly eat up data that users purchase from their mobile carriers, the plaintiffs allege. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Class actions rarely go to trial, which is why a case against Google is proving to be an outlier. The tech giant is defending itself before a jury in Santa Clara County, California, superior court in an $800 million lawsuit by Android smartphone users who say Google misappropriates their cellphone data.A jury of eight women and four men was seated on Tuesday in what lawyers say is expected to be a three-to-four-week trial, with opening statements kicking off on stakes are high, but the class, which includes an estimated 14 million Californians whose mobile devices use Google's Android operating system, is in some ways just an appetizer. The same plaintiffs lawyers from Korein Tillery; Bartlit Beck and McManis Faulkner are litigating a parallel case in San Jose federal court covering Android users in the other 49 states, with billions of dollars in alleged plaintiffs in court papers say that even when their phones are turned off, Google causes Android devices to surreptitiously send information over cellular networks "for Google's own purposes," including targeted digital advertising. These transfers improperly eat up data that users purchase from their mobile carriers, the plaintiffs spokesperson Jose Castaneda said the claims "mischaracterize standard industry practices that help protect users and make phones more reliable," he told me. "We look forward to making our case in court."A unit of Mountain View, California-based Alphabet, Google has a well-used playbook for settling class this week, for example, the company agreed to pay $500 million to resolve shareholder litigation - a move that comes on the heels of a $50 million deal in May to resolve class-wide allegations of racial bias against Black employees and a $100 million payout in March to a proposed class of advertisers who claimed they were overcharged for clicks on why is Google taking this case to trial?In court papers, Google's outside counsel from Cooley argue that Android users incurred no actual losses, and that consumers consented to Google's so-called "passive" data transfers via terms of service agreements and device settings. The lawyers also dispute the fundamental premise of the case: that cellular data allowances can be considered "property" under California law and subject to conversion, a civil cause of action that involves taking a person's property without the "rhetoric and hyperbole are set aside, Plaintiffs' theory is revealed as little more than a (misguided) product design claim - not wrongful conversion," defense counsel Cooley team, which includes Whitty Somvichian, Michael Attanasio, Max Bernstein and Carrie Lebel, declined plaintiffs sued Google in Santa Clara County Superior Court in 2019, asserting that they have a property interest in their cellular plans' data allowances, and that each quantum they pay for has a market don't object to data transmissions when they're actively engaged with Google's apps and properties, like checking email or playing a game. But they say Google never told them it would avail itself of their cellular data when they weren't using their phones to send and receive a range of information on their usage."The upshot is that these phone users unknowingly subsidize the same Google advertising business that earns over $200 billion a year," plaintiffs lawyer George Zelcs of Korein Tillery said via addition to injunctive relief, the plaintiffs want Google to reimburse them for the value of the cellular data the company consumed. Per person, the amount is modest - 1 to 1.5 megabytes of data each day, the plaintiffs estimate. To put that in context, Americans used just over 100 trillion megabytes of wireless data in 2023, my Reuters colleagues with a class period dating back to 2016, the totals add up quickly. In court papers, Google lawyers sound almost incredulous at the amount of the claimed nationwide damages, which they say runs in the tens of billions - more than the $7.4 billion Perdue Pharma settlement for the opioid crisis, they note. "Plaintiffs cannot show remotely commensurate harm to the class," they denying Google's motion for summary judgment in May, Judge Charles Adams allowed the plaintiffs' claim for conversion to go forward, ruling there are triable issues of material fact for jurors to Adams said no direct state law precedent exists as to whether cell phone data is property, he pointed to a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year in the parallel federal class action, Taylor v that case, U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia DeMarchi in San Jose sided with Google and dismissed the complaint with prejudice in 2022, only to be reversed and remanded on appellate panel in an unpublished decision ruled that the plaintiffs plausibly alleged they incurred damages when Google used their cellular in a pre-trial order set some limits on what the lawyers will be allowed to argue to the may not suggest Google engages in "surveillance" of Android users, he wrote, or that the data transfers are a privacy for Google, Adams said, it "must not present evidence or argument suggesting that this case is 'lawyer driven' or was 'invented' by Plaintiffs' counsel."
