Tarball10 2 hours ago

Holding money (or crypto) in PayPal is a terrible idea. They are not a bank, they do not abide by banking regulations. They can lock you out of your account and your money at any time and leave you going in circles with their offshore support.

Yes, they are somewhat of a necessary evil if you do any online peer-to-peer buying/selling, since they are the only money transfer service that provides some level of "buyer protection", but you want to do the bare minimum with PayPal to avoid unnecessary risk.

Link one bank account (not your primary) to PayPal to receive money, and transfer received money immediately. Link one credit card for purchases. Nothing else. Do not link debit cards, do not sign up for their "balance account" where money is held in PayPal (no matter how hard they push it with UI dark patterns in their app), do not sign up for their crypto account.

  • throwaway-0001 2 hours ago

    If you link your bank, and approve direct debit (it’s just a popup with yes/later - very risky move), they will eventually withdraw from it when there are any issues. And most likely you’ll lose more disputes when your bank is linked - but no proof of this so take it with a grain of salt.

  • seydor 2 hours ago

    In europe, Paypal Sarl is a bank subject to bank regulations

    • layer8 an hour ago

      It isn’t subject to the EU statutory deposit insurance, however.

      Edit: The above means that deposits on your PayPal account aren’t insured, different from regular bank accounts in the EU. This is a frequently emphasized caveat regarding the use of PayPal as a bank account in the EU.

      • martin_a 35 minutes ago

        Is that an issue if you don't plan to "store" money in PayPal but only use it for payments?

        • layer8 29 minutes ago

          In that case it isn’t, but this thread is specifically about holding money in PayPal: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45250598

          My point is that one doesn’t get all the protections normally taken for granted for EU bank accounts.

  • Havoc 2 hours ago

    Plus they have a history of freezing people’s money for months on end for flimsy reasons.

    • kotaKat an hour ago

      Staring at a “you can no longer do business with PayPal” email myself. No clue what I did, no recourse, now locked out of a fuckton of global marketplaces and peer to peer transactions that uniquely only work on a platform like PayPal.

      • mistercheph 20 minutes ago

        If only there was a technology which fixes this...

    • babyshake 21 minutes ago

      If this happens to you, I imagine it is grounds for legal action?

  • jonbiggums22 33 minutes ago

    I assume you can't use Crypto instead of the bank account link, you probably require both. Otherwise this might have some use as another blast radius reducer for Paypal's antics.

    I switched to a hardly used checking account for paypal after they held $20 hostage for a couple months after selling an old video card on ebay. I'd heard some one say their bank account had become frozen by paypal during a dispute and that event reminded me of it enough to get some separation.

  • BinaryIgor an hour ago

    Just treat it as your checking account; for anything substantial, move it to the self-custody

  • EbNar 29 minutes ago

    What's the problem with debit cards?

  • Analemma_ 2 hours ago

    This is all true, but are they actually any worse than any other crypto exchange? I just take it as a given that a crypto exchange can lock me out and steal my money at any time with no legal consequence, and so I try to keep as little money in them as possible. And at least PayPal is older and likely to have more senior engineers and fewer vibe coders, and thus be less likely to lose everything because of an elementary security error.

    • spacebanana7 2 hours ago

      No startup can compete with PayPal's decades long track record of suspending accounts and freezing funds.

  • squigz 2 hours ago

    Why does their support being "offshore" matter at all? If they wanted to provide good, user-friendly customer support, they would, regardless of where the reps are?

    • loloquwowndueo 2 hours ago

      > If they wanted to provide good, user-friendly customer support, they would

      Has this been your experience with PayPal?

    • Tarball10 2 hours ago

      Fair enough, maybe "outsourced" would be a better way to put it. Basically they want support to cost them as little as possible and do not particularly care whether it actually offers any useful help to customers.

      More specifically, their support cannot actually do anything to resolve problems. They read off what their computer screen is telling them. They can't take any actions to fix things.

    • Muromec an hour ago

      Because it's offshore so it would be cheap, which already provides a metric that is being optimized.

    • vorpalhex 2 hours ago

      Offshore support is unloved and powerless. They can't and won't fix any issue. They exist to fulfill the obligation to provide support in the cheapest form possible.

dzonga 2 hours ago

one thing with these stablecoins is they're pushing to buying of 'us-debt'.

congrats if you buy a stablecoin - you've effectively financed the US gvt at 0%.

now the US gvt can inflate away that debt at 0 cost to them, and pass on the cost to you.

that's why a bunch of these stablecoin companies are pushing it as a way to save for people in distressed economies.

what a way to steal from the poor.

that's why the crypto act was called GENIUS act.

  • this_user 2 hours ago

    That's not how any of this works. You may not receive any interest on your stablecoin balance, but the issuer certainly does. Why would they offer to lend money to the US government at zero when they can get the market rate and pocket it? What's more, these are mostly short-term instruments This means any increase in inflation will be reflected in their yield.

    • JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago

      > You may not receive any interest on your stablecoin balance, but the issuer certainly does

      A bunch of zero marginal cost capital funding purchases of U.S. debt would absolutely push down rates, possibly lower than inflation, because if you’re a stablecoin issuer you’re not constrained by yield.

      This is a dumb-money venture. And if there is this much money that is this dumb, Treasuries aren’t the worst place for it to go.

      • cortesoft 20 minutes ago

        Even if every dollar of market cap for every crypto currency in the world was invested into us treasuries, it would still be a drop in the bucket and wouldn't drastically change rates.

      • NoahZuniga an hour ago

        All those trilions and trilions of dollars of stablecoins sure are bringing down the us' cost to borrow.

        • JumpCrisscross an hour ago

          > those trilions and trilions of dollars of stablecoins sure are bringing down the us' cost to borrow

          If you think trillions of dollars in de novo price-insensitive demand doesn’t move a market, even one as deep as the Treasury market, I’ve got a stablecoin to sell you.

  • tcgv 7 minutes ago

    It’s actually more of a win-win situation if you look closely.

    Stablecoin issuers earn yield from holding U.S. Treasuries, which sustains their business model. Meanwhile, people in distressed economies get practical access to a digital dollar, often cheaper and faster than navigating restrictive exchange rules or paying steep conversion fees at money-changers. That’s meaningful when local currencies are unstable or losing value.

    Of course, not all stablecoin issuers are trustworthy, and some governments under economic distress may ban or limit these instruments. But when the setup works, both sides benefit.

  • alphazard an hour ago

    > congrats if you buy a stablecoin - you've effectively financed the US gvt at 0%.

    USDC on Coinbase yields interest. The USDC people make a little spread on it, but you aren't financing the US government at 0%, you're financing them at market rates. There is counterparty risk just like with a bank. Unlike a bank, there are liquid markets onchain for other fungibles.

  • mothballed 2 hours ago

    US govt is financed at whatever rate the stable-coin issuer finances at, which is likely a mixture of T-bills, fed overnight interest rates (via bank accounts), and other assets.

  • attila-lendvai 2 hours ago

    didn't you just explain the USD game? (fleecing the poor worldwide through inflation...) stablecoins don't change much in this.

    • jcfrei an hour ago

      Having access to USD is still a lot better than whatever local currency most of these countries have. All those without any real central bank independence (though FED independence has become more questionable in the US as well).

    • scotty79 2 hours ago

      Aren't they sort of printing new dollars privately accelerating the fleecing? Or am I wrong?

    • bilbo0s 2 hours ago

      ...fleecing the poor worldwide...stablecoins don't change much in this

      Just Devil's Advocate, but isn't that a reason not to use stablecoins? I mean, I can participate in the fleecing of the poor without changing anything at all apparently.

      • scotty79 2 hours ago

        It's a reason not to use dollars in any form if you are outside of US (and probably inside as well).

        • gus_massa 2 hours ago

          Usually the local money is even worst. (Hi from Argentina! Not so bad this year so far...)

          • ethbr1 an hour ago

            This is the worry of globally-available USD stablecoins.

            By swapping the volatility from crypto to lower USD volatility, they effectively create a funnel from riskier currencies into dollars.

            Which is the same state that previously existed... except now facilitated by the crypto industry's global accessibility/UX and with less international regulation.

            Blessing USD stablecoins at the US federal level was a smart move (from the US-perspective) as it creates a much bigger demand for dollars, and if the US didn't do it then China or OPEC would have eventually gotten around to it as an end-run around dollar hegemony.

            Winners:

               - Crypto industry (more volume to skim)
               - US Treasury (more demand for debt)
            
            Losers:

               - Countries with less-stable currencies (lose further control of monetary policy)
               - China / OPEC (miss opportunity to push dedollarization further)
            
            TBD:

               - Money laundering (once volume grows, KYC and traceability will follow)
          • attila-lendvai an hour ago

            sure, but there's something twisted in ripping off e.g. poor africans from the other side of the world...

            sure, it couldn't happen without the local warlords, but still...

  • graeme an hour ago

    The total stablecoin marketcap is not that high relative to US debt, and open question whether they're actually buying all the treasuries they claim. Tether has never been audited.

    • DennisP 13 minutes ago

      Times are changing:

      > The GENIUS Act requires permitted payment stablecoin issuers to maintain reserves backing outstanding payment stablecoins on at least a one-to-one basis, and provides that reserves may only consist of certain specified assets, including US dollars, federal reserve notes, funds held at certain insured or regulated depository institutions, certain short-term Treasuries and Treasury-backed reverse repurchase agreements, and money market funds.

      > In addition, the GENIUS Act requires stablecoin issuers to provide monthly public reporting as to the composition of their reserve portfolios on their website, and requires larger issuers (with more than $50 billion in consolidated total outstanding issuance) to publish annual audited financial statements. These monthly reports must be examined by a registered public accounting firm, and the CEO and CFO of a permitted payment stablecoin issuer must certify the accuracy of these reports to the primary federal payment stablecoin regulator or state payment stablecoin regulator, as applicable.

      https://www.lw.com/en/insights/the-genius-act-of-2025-stable...

dotancohen 2 hours ago

What is this paypal-corp.com website? I immediately suspected phishing when I saw that.

Doubly so when the feature being discussed is crypto related.

  • fweimer an hour ago

    Add the end of https://www.paypal.com/us/home there is a Hewsroom link to https://newsroom.paypal-corp.com/ . They use https://about.pypl.com/about-us/default.aspx as well. At one point, employee email accounts used paypal-inc.com. It might not even be a SEO thing, it could just reflect their corporate structure and the different IT teams.

    I agree that it is confusing.

    • pbhjpbhj 19 minutes ago

      It's a little annoying, but as long as the main domain has a paste that links to the dodgy-looking domain then it's bearable.

      Ideally, companies would have a page "all the domains we use" as part of their footer links.

      So many companies that should know better are helping to enable phishing by using random domains.

CalRobert 3 hours ago

I thought the whole point of a decentralised ledger was not needing companies like PayPal…

  • tshaddox 4 minutes ago

    I thought the point was more that you can't be required to use companies like PayPal in order to use the underlying technology.

  • 1970-01-01 2 hours ago

    This point is conveniently missing. There's simply more money to be made! Now get out of here with your nonsense ideas of decentralizing money. It's bad for business.

  • Lerc 2 hours ago

    The power of not needing companies like PayPal does not preclude them from offering services that ease its use.

    The benefit comes from having the option to go elsewhere. A business that cannot lock you in is more likely to try to retain your custom by offering a good service.

  • ecb_penguin 2 hours ago

    That is the point! You don't need companies like Paypal... Companies often offer services that are "not needed" because people like convenience, ease of use, etc.

    You don't need Paypal to use Bitcoin, but there's nothing in the spec that prohibits it.

    • Night_Thastus 2 hours ago

      I think their point is that in the end, most people want convenience. That convenience requires centralization, which eliminates a lot of the supposed benefits that something like cryptocurrencies were promoted with. We've already seen it play out very poorly several times in crypto already.

      • pants2 2 hours ago

        This adds convenience because I can instantly send ETH from Robinhood to PayPal to Coinbase to my Ledger, without dealing with banking rails or creating a taxable event.

  • BinaryIgor an hour ago

    It's not that simple, there's a niuance there - tradeoffs are to to be made if we want to have a decentralized system; it will not scale to the whole planet, if running a node is accessible; and it must be so, otherwise it's not decentralized.

    The reality is, we will have a mix of custodian - through third-party - and self-sovereign usage; depending on the context and user's skill

  • jmcgough 2 hours ago

    PayPal has been slowly circling the drain for years, grasping at highly questionable Hail Mary's like crypto coins.

  • xhkkffbf 2 hours ago

    The Internet is decentralized but most of us use ISPs to connect to it. Most of can't access the Internet without these companies.

    In practice, the word "decentralized" just speaks to whether anyone can join in the protocol if they want. But it doesn't mean the protocol is easy to implement.

Kelteseth 3 hours ago

Is this a legit PayPal domain?Sounds like a fake domain.

egorfine 33 minutes ago

Title: PayPal [..] Reimagining How Money Moves to Anyone, Anywhere.

Text: PayPal users in the U.S. can begin [..] today, with international expansion [..] starting later this month.

So immediately out of the box it is exactly NOT for "anyone" and NOT "anywhere".

This is contagious: a couple of years ago Gnosis tried to launch their Gnosis Card[1] on Berlin DappCon with the exact same slogan: "Anyone, anywhere" while only accepting applications from a select group of people living in select EU countries.

I have had discussion with their CEO right there regarding this marketingspeak but he did not seem to grasp what's the problem at all here.

You can't make this shit up.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4_6aOUagY4

  • DennisP 7 minutes ago

    Well in fairness they have "reimagined" how money moves to anyone anywhere, they just haven't changed it yet. Plus they used a verb tense suggesting the process is ongoing. If they said "we just changed how money moves to anyone anywhere" then that would be inaccurate, but that's not what they said.

egorfine 42 minutes ago

Great. I can't wait to attach recent utility bills with every stablecoin transaction.

adamors 2 hours ago

I’ve happily avoided Paypal in the last .. 6 years or so. Ever since Revolut came up with disposable cards I’m much less hesitant to give my card details to someone, also PP never stopped being shady and user-hostile in the meantime.

So I’ll continue to avoid them in the next 6 years as well.

olivia-banks 2 hours ago

One of the reasons I don't think crypto can succeed is because people will only use it if it's convenient, which very likely means corporate involvement, which of course ultimately defeats the whole argument of being decentralized.

  • DennisP 3 minutes ago

    Corporate involvement isn't that bad as the user can exit to fully decentralized operation in case of abuse.

  • cturner 41 minutes ago

    Without convenience it will not be successful as a common currency. It does not need convenience to succeed in other ways. For example, as a store of value.

kundi an hour ago

I find it hard to trust and believe any corporation incapable of rendering a responsive website on mobile

lagniappe 2 hours ago

As they say not your keys not your money

ionwake an hour ago

I’m so confused I remember this headline from like 8 years ago

smoyer 2 hours ago

Is this using x402 under the covers?

baobabKoodaa 2 hours ago

What a weird timeline we live in. Absolutely bonkers.

sneak 2 hours ago

You can be sure that the “anyone, anywhere” claimed is a lie.

  • egorfine 43 minutes ago

    Oh absolutely. They even explain it right in the press-release: "users in the U.S. can [...] with international expansion [...] starting later this month".

    Of course it will be as far from "anyone" or "anywhere" as possible, because they will start the crypto expansion in a much more restrictive fashion than TradFi.

raincole 2 hours ago

Cool. Wake me up when Paypal isn't trying to police what kind of porn people can watch online.

  • dewey 2 hours ago

    They are probably not the one that care, it's most likely Visa / MasterCard that have an issue with that.

    • raincole 2 hours ago

      Nope. If there is someone more eager to police content than Visa, it's Paypal.

      There are sites that still support Visa / Mastercard but removed their Paypal support. SubscribeStar, for example.

crimsoneer an hour ago

So hold on, does this mean I can pay with crypto anywhere that accepts Paypal? Because if so that's kind of a big deal, but not at all clear to me if that is the case...

linhns 2 hours ago

Cash is king for me.

1970-01-01 2 hours ago

Wake me when eBay accepts BTC in exchange for silver dollars or even collector coins. They're still afraid to do the very hard thing and challenge the status quo on an even playing field.

johnwheeler 2 hours ago

I don’t understand all the immediate negativity surrounding this. Can someone in the know explain what the ramifications are?

  • baobabKoodaa 2 hours ago

    People who hate crypto will hate anything that has anything to do with crypto.

    People who love crypto will hate anything that has anything to do with legacy censorship-prone fraudulent financial institutions like PayPal.

    Who is this for?

    • dudefeliciano an hour ago

      the people that neither hate nor love crypto?

  • iammrpayments 13 minutes ago

    I hate paypal, because they froze my money for 6 months and destroyed my mental health for weeks. Compared to other people my situation was not even bad.

imcritic 2 hours ago

PayPal locks people out of their money. Screw them, never using this shit again.

tootie 2 hours ago

When Bitcoin first hit public consciousness the knock from economists was that it had a built-in deflationary spiral and that seems to be true. The price keeps going up and up with a few noted bumps. Rising value is great for speculators but it's a death knell for an actual spending currency. You'd be nuts to spend it if you expect it to appreciate. That's why central banks aim for low but positive inflation.

  • hippich 2 hours ago

    I think the difference here is that Bitcoin is predictable deflationary vs fiat being unpredictable. If you can know in advance the rate, it becomes sorta like an investment vehicle, where instead of dividends you get appreciation of the assets.

    To look at it another way - why one would spend $100 from their brokerage account if they know a year later they can spend $110?