The Google Pay app is dead | Hacker News Reader

The Google Pay app is dead

arstechnica.com

59 pointscurt1569 comments

Banking apps are working to take control of instant P2P payments through the new FedNow service.

The idea is that this will eventually become a standard feature of most US checking accounts --- just like a debit card. No 3rd parties or their added fees required.

https://explore.fednow.org

This is how bank accounts in the rest of the world have worked forever.

No, they haven't. "Instant Payments"/"Instant Credit Transfers" are specifically transfers completed in seconds. Banks usually charge more for this service than for regular transfers, which complete on the next business day.

IIRC, in Europe, instant transfers were introduced around 2018.

The EU recently mandated instant SEPA transfers be free. UPI (India) and PIX (Brazil) have similarly very low cost instant transfers. There are ~54 instant payment systems globally as of this comment. https://fastpayments.worldbank.org/ looks like it'll eventually track this, but is sparse at the moment. https://www.pymnts.com/tracker/real-time-payments-world-map-... has more info if you're willing to register, which is annoying.

You're just pushing iso 20022 messages around for most of these systems to transfer value.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_20022

And in Scandinavia we have Vipps that lets you send money to a person knowing only their mobile number.

Since when is a phone number a form of bank identity?

The term of art is an alias or proxy identifier, and you specify it in your banking app (which should have strong identity controls around it; also, a confirmation email or SMS OTP is sent). At least with Zelle, when you add a new contact to make instant payments from an email address or phone number, the app will surface the first name of the deposit account owner so you can confirm the person you're sending funds to is who you intend to send funds to. Passing around long account numbers for funds transfers is poor UX. Consider Venmo is a photo of someone and their Venmo handle, similar with TransferWise.

https://fastpayments.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/2021-...

Vipps is for Norway, not Scandinavia. Sweden uses Swish for similar functionality. I'm not sure what Denmark uses.

https://www.atlar.com/guides/bank-payments-in-denmark

> Danes have been making use of instant account-to-account transfers since the launch of Express Clearing (‘Straksclearing’) in 2014. Today, the mobile payment app MobilePay is used by almost everyone for instant peer-to-peer transfers. Traditional payment types such as direct debits are still widely used, however. Having been around for several decades, the direct debit schemes 'Betalingsservice' and 'Leverandørservice' are used by consumers and businesses respectively.

> All retail bank payments in Denmark are settled in the Kronos2 system, owned by the country's central bank, Danmarks Nationalbank, and cleared in one of three systems: Sum Clearing (‘Sumclearing’), Intraday Clearing (‘Intradagclearing’), and Express Clearing (‘Straksclearing’). These three systems dictate the settlement capabilities of the main schemes and payment methods available in Denmark.

https://vippsmobilepay.com/en/news/2024/03/12/new-app-in-den...

That's some good news. Hopefully they'll expand it to also apply in Sweden. Although a system that works in all of Europe would be even more ideal.

> The EU recently mandated instant SEPA transfers be free

Small nitpick: The EU mandated that instant SEPA should cost no more than regular (slow) SEPA. We all expect this to be zero, since regular SEPA is currently free under almost all conditions, but: zero isn't the law.

Src.: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2024...

Reasonable point to point out.

No charge for instant payments in my bank in Norway (SBanken/DNB)

In UK Faster Payments available in most banks since 2011.

When I lived in Germany in 2009 paying for gym memberships or rent was all done with instant transfers.

Will this integration have the same limits as Zelle? I tried to send my mother some money but Zelle said I was only allowed to send $1,000 and that I "may" be able to send more in the future after more payments to that contact. A wire has no such limitation and can be practically "instant" with same-day settlement if you send it early enough.

Max value transfer for the system is currently $500k, although most institutions are starting at $100k. To move value is $0.045, to request payment is $0.01 (charged to the institution plugged into the rails, not necessarily the financial services customer).

https://www.frbservices.org/news/press-releases/012722-fedno...

That is your bank’s policies with Zelle. For whatever reason, it seems your bank does not trust you yet.

For example, these are BoA’s limits:

https://www.bankofamerica.com/online-banking/zelle-transfer-...

I think it was less of the bank not trusting me and more not trusting my mother, as she had just set up her account for Zelle that day. Either way, there are not this many security gates when writing a check, and it's insulting to deny me access to send my own money as I see fit. If it was about trusting me they would not have let me send the wire (which is the same as Zelle when it comes to inability to claw back money).

Usually the bank charges a wire transfer fee, which may cover the risk premium.

Also, the government recently required banks to recover Zelle transfers. I imagine this costs banks money?

https://www.reuters.com/technology/cybersecurity/payments-ap...

> Lenders on Zelle are also now required to implement a tool that flags transfers with risky attributes, such as a payment to an account that has never transacted on the Zelle network, said Chance. He said Zelle has seen "a step-change reduction" in fraud and scam rates this year but declined to provide details.

My bank allows me to send wires without charge.

The few US banks that offer "free" outgoing wires usually have other restrictions such as a large minimum account balance.

Fidelity cash management account has free incoming and outgoing wires, no minimum balances, and ATM fee reimbursement. It's not technically a bank though, it's a brokerage account with banking features - https://www.fidelity.com/spend-save/fidelity-cash-management...

A wire has no such limitation and can be practically "instant" with same-day settlement if you send it early enough.

A wire usually comes with some hefty fees and as you point out, it is restricted to "banker's hours".

FedNow transactions are fully automated and designed to work instantly 24/7/365. The cost to banks will be a few pennies each to support the system operation.

Banks being banks, some will probably try to add a fee for this initially but I expect competition will quickly reduce this to zero. Debit card transactions are typically "free" now but the real cost to banks is actually more than what a FedNow transaction is supposed to be.

My bank however is opting out of paying with their app at terminals in favor of Google wallet...

It says JP Morgan Chase is on the list of providers, but in my online chase.com dashboard, I have zero reference to this service, nor can I find any way to use it.

All I see is the ancient dinosaur bill pay service, the ancient dinosaur wire service, the hideously expensive ach service, and then zelle. Some places accept zelle, some don't. Some people accept zelle, some don't. Which makes it impossible to use.

All those services suck. So what that means in real life, is just that everyone uses venmo and nothing else. Which I dislike greatly, but am forced to use.

I REALLY wish I could use this FedNow service, but I simply can't figure out HOW to do so.

I REALLY wish I could use this FedNow service, but I simply can't figure out HOW to do so.

The FedNow service just went live in July of last year. Banks are still working to implement and test the new protocols and build it into their customer apps but it should be coming "real soon".

https://techcrunch.com/2023/07/21/fednow-is-finally-live-in-...

You might be surprised how much this varies. I don’t know anyone who uses Venmo and never needed it. I do use Zelle in a few cases when a credit card doesn’t work.

It beats checks but is still rather annoying because sometimes Zelle says “no” for mysterious reasons.

Zelle is so useless. I really wish it would just go away!

Until they protect us from fraud like credit cards, I’m not interested as the banks transfer all the risk to the user on these products. Why anyone would use a debit card in the United States is beyond me.

Why anyone would use a debit card in the United States is beyond me.

Why would anyone use Venmo with even less protection? But millions of people do.

Huh? Venmo (since being bought by PayPal) has the strongest fraud protections that exist. It's why online P2P marketplaces have huge banners saying "If they don't accept Venmo or PayPal G&S it's a scammer."

Venmo/PayPal are unique in that they'll insure an informal purchase agreement between two people neither of which have a merchant agreement with them.

I've heard so many stories of people sending money by P2P in Venmo and having pretty much zero recourse. There's fraud protection for merchant accounts but sending cash P2P between normal user accounts there's pretty much no protections.

Read up all the stories of people sending money to the wrong Venmo user and support not being any help about it.

Venmo is excellent in detecting fraudsters - people in business stealing money.

However if you make a mistake and send money to a user which is some random house keeper or baby sitter then oh well…

Venmo/PayPal are unique in that they'll insure an informal purchase agreement between two people neither of which have a merchant agreement with them.

Would you care to test this? Venmo someone you know $50 and then try to reverse it without their consent. Let me know how it goes.

Venmo makes it incredibly easy to send money to the wrong user tag.

If I have the bare minimum of messages between the two of us establishing that I'm buying something from them, what the price is, and I hit the "Turn on For Purchases" button then I will absolutely get my money back. Have done it multiple times.

I'm not sure how you took "will protect a purchase agreement" to "will protect a random unspecified transfer."

That’s not why those marketplaces say so. Those marketplaces state that because it deters the lowest effort scammers (pretending to offer cash, paying through gift cards, etc). It says nothing about how good Venmo/PayPal is at handling fraud or detecting it.

Sure it does, I've even been the victim of scammers when buying festival tickets. I paid with PayPal G&S, the scammer deleted all their messages with me, obviously didn't send tickets. It took 15 minutes with support and I got my money back, no harm no foul.

Because of this all the scammers pretend to only have Zelle.

This is actually worse than a debit card because in the case of unauthorized transactions your bank can reverse the charge.

But it is better than "linking your bank" or wire transfers because FedNow has a request / fulfill flow instead of "give us access to take an unspecified amount from your bank."

Debit cards have same chargeback options as credit cards.

Do they? With a credit card, the impact of a fraudulent charge is I click "dispute charge", and my credit limit is effectively lowered by the amount of the fraudulent charge. If the dispute is resolved in my favor, great. If not, I eventually have to pay it off.

It's my understanding that with a debit card, even if you dispute the charge, the money is still gone until the dispute is resolved. Is that not true? If so, that's quite a big difference. I suppose it's the "same", but there's a big practical difference between "my money is gone" and "my credit limit is reduced."

Actually, there is a law in the United States that says the lender is responsible and the loan is essentially invalid if the underlying purchase is based on fraud. Any protection you receive from a debit card transaction is essentially at the mercy of whatever the bank chooses to do and some banks claim you are protected and most don't, but it doesn't have the force of federal law the way it does with a credit card.

I've been asking for years when this sentiment pops up, and I'm going to ask again: What specific examples are there of debit card users holding all of the risk in the US?

It isn't legislated as it is with credit cards, but I've so far been unable to find any instances that don't have a contractual resolution process for fraudulent charges.

I was in Brazil once, atm skimmed my card and 100% of money in the account was withdrawn.

There was a resolution process, and it was great. Bank refunded 100% of the money….after 2-3 months.

I was extremely happy all things considered but you simply don’t have that risk profile with credit cards.

(I had used an official atm inside a mall with armed guards and cameras, which Brazilians and guides recommended. After the incident I instead used the atm inside a bank, past their bulletproof glass and metal detected security, guarded by a guard with a machine gun. No skimming there.)

I've had a few friends get hit with massive fraud on their debit cards. Completely wiping them out cash-wise. They didn't have any credit cards either, because hey credit cards are evil and a trap.

It left them with absolutely nothing for weeks while the bank sorted it out. They couldn't make rent. They couldn't buy groceries. They couldn't put gas in their car. Sure, the vast majority of the charges were considered fraudulent (not all) so they mostly got their money back, but it was a rough few weeks for them. I've seen that played out three times so far.

Meanwhile there's been fraud on my wife's credit card a few times over the years. Zero impact to my daily life, because 1) generally the credit limits I have are far higher than the cash I'd normally keep in a checking account and 2) I could still fall back on the cash and other credit cards I had.

Also, IIRC, every time I disputed those transactions I think it instantly released that credit hold on my account, so I had that credit back right away.

Even dealing with point of sale and customer support issues becomes a lot easier when they know you're a few taps on your phone away from reversing a transaction. Make it clear that it's something you're very comfortable with, routine even, not a bother at all, and almost like you're doing them a favor by handling it on your end. They won't see it that way, of course, but it gives you all the leverage in the negotiation without it getting ugly.

Try it next time someone says their point of sale policy only lets them offer you store credit or an exchange. Say, oh that's fine, my credit card lets me reverse the transaction if I couldn't resolve the matter with the store, so I'll just do that. The very next response will be a miraculous change in the store's policy.

Just want to add in addition to what other users have said that the window on fraud discovery is generally much narrower on your bank account than with a credit card. You get 90 days with a credit card generally, but bank account transactions are generally 30 days or less, or even smaller for corporate accounts on some transactions.

I think you'll have to log into your bank account to send money - it won't be taken by the receiver. Every other country has this. And the recipient has clear identification, so if there's a dispute, you go to the police and say they stole your money. Since the recipient is known and in the same jurisdiction, the transaction is reversible by the courts.

I think you misunderstand the whole concept of P2P payment apps - it’s meant to be digital cash and replace physical money.

Credit cards can afford to protect you from fraud because of the high level of trust between companies and the point of sales - too many fraudulent purchases and they stop accepting the transactions. Not to mention the fees they charge to both the purchasers and sellers!

If you get scammed with a debit card, cash, or a P2P app, that’s a matter for small claims courts, and if you’re lucky, maybe the police will charge them with a crime. But the risk is on the individual, and that’s a feature, not a bug.

Do you generally carry up to $500k in cash with you every day? A level that most corporations would consider high enough to use an armed guard with an armored car?

This is exactly my point. The bank gives you a login. Claims the design of the product is your responsibility for everything and you have to protect your login and then washes their hands of any responsibility.

"Why anyone would use a debit card in the United States is beyond me"

I don't think you understand the law. If you have fraudulent debit card purchases and you haven't lost your debit card, you have 60 days to report them with 0 liability.

Summary: https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/credit-cards/credit-card-...

zelle by any other name is just another scammer target

Meanwhile, Google Pay has emerged as the king of UPI payments in India, with annualised transaction value worth $110 billion.

Sometimes, so tightly focused US-only news without even recognising it as such amuses me.

https://techcrunch.com/2024/02/12/india-stumped-on-how-to-cu...

Is this down through the old Google Pay app, not through the newer Wallet app? I use "Google Pay", as in the payment processor, every day, but it is being done through the wallet app.

It is the Google Pay app. The Google Wallet app is separate and (at least in India) do not have payment functionality.

Edited to add: actually the popular app in India is GPay which I think is different from the older Google Pay.

Google's payment apps are very confusing.

Unfortunately, that's the exact problem here: Google tried to force their Indian application internationally without exactly understanding the differences between different markets (big one is forced mobile number registration, which I understand is not a big deal in India but it's a significant friction in the US). For users outside of India, it is a mess compared to how Apple (and even Samsung at this point) does it.

Besides the hot mess that is Google's branding and app strategy for their (not only) payment-related products that I'm sure others will comment on:

I wonder what the business model was going to be here? Facilitating P2P payments in the US is anything but free, especially when done over card rails as Google Pay did, as far as I remember.

Were they sponsored by one or both of the networks initially (I vaguely remember hearing something about Mastercard Send, but that could have been Meta), and were they hoping they'd grow enough to keep those terms?

Were they hoping to find a business model along the way, maybe in combination with the abandoned banking project?

Using (aka selling) transactions history is one

I will never understand why people prefer to sell their private data and pay to spend their own money rather than just use cryptocurrency.

Because when I go to the grocery store they don't usually take PEPE or WinDOGE98.

Cryptocurrency gives that same data away for free, to everyone.

You still have to pay blockchain fees on crypto transactions.

Of all Google's confusing product duplications and overlapping function, "GPay" vs. "Google Pay" vs. "Google Wallet" was possibly the most confusing.

And Android Pay, I forgot my wallet one day, decide to use Android Pay but was block with : "Android Pay is replace by Google Pay, you need to update...". The shame of not been able to pay loose ma confident to use Google for this.

It's seems Google Pay was written in flutter [0]. Wondering what went so wrong and if it's another canary that they might be winding down flutter after reducing the team and all founders left the boat.

[0] https://flutter.dev/showcase/google-pay

Maybe. On the other hand, maybe it’s the same as them canning Stadia (whose app was also Flutter).

This diagram is really interesting. I don't know if I'm any less confused though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Pay_(payment_method)

Love how they clarify payment apps #1 and #4 have the same name.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com