‘Buy now, pay later’ is booming. But companies are facing pressure to change.

U.S. regulators, worried about consumer debt and unregulated credit, could force the companies to rein in practices that have turbocharged their growth.

Afterpay app

Afterpay and others are facing changes.

Photo: Brent Lewin/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Click banner image for more Shopping Week coverage

This holiday season, merchants are poised to use "buy now, pay later" like never before.

Not just a hot new payments or ecommerce feature, it's also a key marketing feature to drive more sales for merchants. The growth has been quick. Consumers are expected to make $100 billion in "buy now, pay later" purchases in 2021, up from $24 billion in 2020, and could increase up to 15 times its current volume by 2025.

An indication of the flux in this new market is that there isn't even agreement about whether "buy now, pay later" purchases are in fact loans. Companies and merchants tout them as convenience features or payment plans, but more regulators and consumer advocates view them as loans that should have the same protections as credit cards or other forms of consumer credit.

Consumers' views matter, too. Right now, many shoppers see "buy now, pay later" as different from traditional credit cards. But that halo could wear off if more have bad experiences with pay-later plans.

There's no disputing the momentum behind "buy now, pay later." Beyond the pure "buy now, pay later" providers like Affirm, Klarna and Afterpay, traditional retailers like Macy's, Target and Walmart are all pushing their own "buy now, pay later" offerings — with the hopes of seeing fewer abandoned shopping carts and bigger baskets.

The companies promote "buy now, pay later" as a better alternative to credit card debt because of lower fees, low or no interest and more transparency. And many consumers, especially younger ones, have moved away from credit cards to avoid getting into debt.

But while "buy now, pay later" can offer benefits compared to credit cards, there are lurking issues that could present challenges to the companies this holiday shopping season.

Consumer confusion

In complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, consumers have said that they've had problems with purchases, either because they couldn't make a return or get a refund, or got charged with fees they didn't understand.

Consumers also do not always understand the risks of these products, said Rachel Gittleman, financial services outreach manager at Consumer Federation of America.

"These products are credit and carry the same consequences for defaulting as other types of loans," she wrote in a letter to the House Financial Services Committee.

This kind of confusion can lead to consumers falling behind on payments. In a recent study by Credit Karma, one-third of consumers who used "buy now, pay later" products had fallen behind on one or more payments, and 72% of them said their credit score dropped.

In its September quarter, Affirm's delinquencies over 30 days were about 2.6%, ticking up considerably from the overall fiscal year where they were 1% as the company has sought to open up to a broader range of consumers. Affirm has said that it underwrites each transaction individually using data beyond credit scores, rather than extending a line of credit, to ensure consumers can repay.

Afterpay's net transaction loss as a percentage of overall sales was 0.6% for its year ending in June. Afterpay says 95% of transactions do not incur a late fee and close to one-third of customers make the majority of payments early. To ensure people don't get too far into debt, Afterpay suspends consumers from its system if they are late for a payment.

"Even when people do pay the installments, there's likely a higher number of people who are also at the same time racking up credit card debt," said Melody Brue, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy. "It's sort of ironic that some of these 'buy now, pay later' options are meant to be for people not tapping into credit, but they actually are."

If consumers rack up debt or complaints rise, the companies could lose customers — or money, if the loans don't get paid back. This could undermine one of the big claims for "buy now, pay later": that it's cheaper, easier and better for consumers' credit than a credit card.

The regulatory hammer

Right now, "buy now, pay later" is not regulated in the way that credit cards are. That means there are no standards for disclosures on fees, amounts owed, credit reporting and payments. Even the due date of a "buy now, pay later" payment is not as clear as a credit card with a consistent payment date.

"Right now, one of the biggest issues is that they're operating pretty much largely outside of the regulatory system and outside of federal and state oversight for a variety of different reasons," Gittleman said.

That could change as regulators rein them in.

The U.K. and Australia, where "buy now, pay later" has taken off even faster than in the U.S., have placed these products under a regulatory regime. In the U.K., the Financial Conduct Authority in February said "buy now, pay later" would come under its rules after finding that consumers thought the products carried the same "rights and protections" as regulated forms of credit. The Australian Finance Industry Association created a code of conduct for "buy now, pay later" after a Senate inquiry.

In the U.S., "buy now, pay later" services are covered under the Dodd-Frank Act's protections for deceptive or abusive lending practices, which are enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB has issued a warning to consumers on "buy now, pay later," and has already brought a case against one company offering income-share agreements, a possible indication of broader intentions on consumer credit.

But "buy now, pay later" often isn't covered by the federal Truth in Lending Act, which requires disclosure of terms and cost of services, since it typically only applies to purchases with five or more installments.

Even though most "pay-in-four" products are exempt from those federal rules, California has classified some pay-later products as loans. The California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation settled with three "buy now, pay later" companies last year over charges they had made illegal loans.

As a measure of Congress' increasing interest, the House Financial Services Committee recently held a hearing entitled "Buy Now, Pay More Later?" Legislators are concerned about consumer protections, disclosure, credit reporting and consumers taking on unsustainable debt.

"The pay-in-4 business model ... has been criticized by some for being specifically designed to evade lending regulation such as the Truth in Lending Act," Democratic Rep. Stephen Lynch said.

But pay-later companies say that delinquency rates are low overall and lower than credit cards. Klarna has said its delinquency rate is less than 1% globally. The companies say they use sophisticated underwriting to select consumers that are able to pay back their debts.

However, many "buy now, pay later" companies only do a soft credit check, if any. If they don't do a hard credit check, they won't know when consumers are using multiple "buy now, pay later" providers — and therefore don't really know whether consumers can pay for their purchases.

"There are troubling indications that BNPL products may lead consumers to incur debt they cannot afford to repay. Disturbingly, part of the business model of some BNPL providers may count on consumers who do not pay on time and who incur late fees," said Lauren Saunders, an associate director at the National Consumer Law Center, at the House hearing. PayPal recently eliminated late fees, matching Affirm's longstanding practice, while Klarna and Afterpay do charge late fees.

It's unclear if or when regulators will force changes in "buy now, pay later." Brue said that the industry "is certainly ripe for regulation … I do think that there's a need for more regulation around it, or there's just a need for the industry to come up with some standards and shared visibility into consumer debt."

The companies have already made some changes ahead of regulation, and could make more. Last month, in response to the U.K.'s upcoming crackdown, Klarna added a "pay now" option for consumers to pay what they owe in full.

"Buy now, pay later" companies grew quickly by filling a need for cheaper, more convenient credit — and exploiting some gaps in regulation. But like other startups in regulated industries, they will have to come to figure out how to fit into the existing rules. Otherwise regulators may well figure it out for them. The question is what those changes will cost them.


What the economic downturn means for pay packages

The war for talent rages on, but dynamics are shifting back to the employers.

Compensation packages could start to look different as companies reshuffle the balance of cash and equity.

Illustration: Nuthawut Somsuk/Getty Images

The market is turning. Tech stocks are slumping — which is bad news for employees — and even industry powerhouses are slowing hiring and laying people off. Tech talent is still in high demand, but compensation packages could start to look different as companies recruit.

“It’s a little bit like whiplash,” compensation consultant Ashish Raina said of the downturn. Raina, who mainly works with startups that have 200 to 800 employees, previously worked as the director of Talent at Index Ventures and head of Compensation and Talent Analytics at Box. “I do think there’s going to be an interesting reckoning in terms of pay increases going forward, how that pay is delivered.”

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.
Sponsored Content

Why the digital transformation of industries is creating a more sustainable future

Qualcomm’s chief sustainability officer Angela Baker on how companies can view going “digital” as a way not only toward growth, as laid out in a recent report, but also toward establishing and meeting environmental, social and governance goals.

Three letters dominate business practice at present: ESG, or environmental, social and governance goals. The number of mentions of the environment in financial earnings has doubled in the last five years, according to GlobalData: 600,000 companies mentioned the term in their annual or quarterly results last year.

But meeting those ESG goals can be a challenge — one that businesses can’t and shouldn’t take lightly. Ahead of an exclusive fireside chat at Davos, Angela Baker, chief sustainability officer at Qualcomm, sat down with Protocol to speak about how best to achieve those targets and how Qualcomm thinks about its own sustainability strategy, net zero commitment, other ESG targets and more.

Keep Reading Show less
Chris Stokel-Walker

Chris Stokel-Walker is a freelance technology and culture journalist and author of "YouTubers: How YouTube Shook Up TV and Created a New Generation of Stars." His work has been published in The New York Times, The Guardian and Wired.


How 'Zuck Bucks' saved the 2020 election — and fueled the Big Lie

The true story of how Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan’s $419 million donation became the 2020 election’s most enduring conspiracy theory.

Mark Zuckerberg is smack in the center of one of the 2020 election’s multitudinous conspiracies.

Illustration: Mike McQuade; Photos: Getty Images

If Mark Zuckerberg could have imagined the worst possible outcome of his decision to insert himself into the 2020 election, it might have looked something like the scene that unfolded inside Mar-a-Lago on a steamy evening in early April.

There in a gilded ballroom-turned-theater, MAGA world icons including Kellyanne Conway, Corey Lewandowski, Hope Hicks and former president Donald Trump himself were gathered for the premiere of “Rigged: The Zuckerberg Funded Plot to Defeat Donald Trump.”

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.


From frenzy to fear: Trading apps grapple with anxious investors

After riding the stock-trading wave last year, trading apps like Robinhood have disenchanted customers and jittery investors.

Retail stock trading is still an attractive business, as shown by the news that crypto exchange FTX is dipping its toes in the market by letting some U.S. customers trade stocks.

Photo: Lam Yik/Bloomberg via Getty Images

For a brief moment, last year’s GameStop craze made buying and selling stocks cool, even exciting, for a new generation of young investors. Now, that frenzy has turned to fear.

Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev pointed to “a challenging macro environment” marked by rising prices and interest rates and a slumping market in a call with analysts explaining his company’s lackluster results. The downturn, he said, was something “most of our customers have never experienced in their lifetimes.”

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.


Broadcom is reportedly in talks to acquire VMware

It hasn't been long since it left the ownership of Dell Technologies.

Photo: Yichuan Cao/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Broadcom is said to be in discussions with VMware to buy the cloud computing company for as much as $50 billion.

Keep Reading Show less
Jamie Condliffe

Jamie Condliffe ( @jme_c) is the executive editor at Protocol, based in London. Prior to joining Protocol in 2019, he worked on the business desk at The New York Times, where he edited the DealBook newsletter and wrote Bits, the weekly tech newsletter. He has previously worked at MIT Technology Review, Gizmodo, and New Scientist, and has held lectureships at the University of Oxford and Imperial College London. He also holds a doctorate in engineering from the University of Oxford.

Latest Stories