Paypal status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Paypal reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by Paypal users through our website.

• Sign in (41%)
• Errors (37%)
• Website Down (22%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent Paypal outage reports came from the following cities:

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Gérardmer	Sign in	12 hours ago
Township of Evan	Sign in	1 day ago
Lodève	Errors	2 days ago
Brisbane	Sign in	2 days ago
Sydney	Sign in	3 days ago
Hochfelden	Website Down	4 days ago

Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Paypal Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  [カで] (@xjpegx) reported 3 minutes ago

  Booth itself accepts both foreign credit cards and paypal so that shouldn't be a problem either. It's a bit less convenient than buyee, but also has lower fees.

• 
  Blake Hendrix 🚀 (@ProtonShark75) reported 4 minutes ago

  @Dannieshanice If you're in the US call 8445697700 and they'll fix Netflix. They were fantastic. They needed my Paypal transaction number to verify.

• 
  Context OS (@context_os_) reported 4 minutes ago

  @ilyanovohatskyi @webflow Had to same issue with NameCheap, fortunately I paid with PayPal and they refunded me

• 
  Frank LaCroix (Frank is my pen name) (@lylemurphy18389) reported 5 minutes ago

  Banks used to be heavyweight investments. Not so much anymore. Look at the last 138 days: XLF (Financials) is now behaving almost like XLU (Utilities) — slow, low-growth, defensive. Meanwhile fintech and crypto keep taking share: • Payment apps (PayPal, Venmo, Chime, X Money…) • Digital banking • DeFi / crypto rails • Even newer players moving into underwriting Traditional banks are losing the energy that used to make them cyclical leaders. Capital and growth are flowing elsewhere. The sector chart makes it pretty clear. Anyone else seeing this shift?

• 
  proxy for korea japan online & offline kpop anime (@wendyproxy) reported 12 minutes ago

  2026 CORTIS TOUR <PUT YOUR PHONE DOWN> BIRTHDAY PARTY POP-UP 📅 ~08/18 🛒proxy fee 5000 won ea 💳 wise and paypal only 📦domestic shipping and ww 📍korea offline #wendyproxy 양도 wts wtb

• 
  Kpl (@Fujoshi_50_kpl) reported 14 minutes ago

  The Singapore concert, last minute had some Western Union issue with the TS account . I had already paid a small amount for my queue with no problem but while paying a bigger amount something went wrong. TS did not have PayPal. So I thought will try for WE FM in Taipei but again KKTIX platform my mobile could not be verified inspite of multiple mails coz for The top tier tickets it needed to be verified 😭😭😭. Here also I paid about 4USD to Queue :( My badluck. I'm just hoping my luck won't be the same for WE concert coz I really really need it for so many reasons will tell you when and if we meet 🥹

• 
  conor!! (@playdeadpool) reported 15 minutes ago

  willing to go down to £950 + the paypal fee if anyone is still interested 🥹

• 
  Crunchman61 🐺🪽 (@crunchman61) reported 21 minutes ago

  Called Paypal and my bank today since I was in the group affected by the Novel Horizons shut down. Sadly the transaction was too far outside of their windows of dispute for them to be able to do anything for me so I'm out 280 for a Sinder figure I never got. Yay...

• 
  Genius Business (@GeniusBusiness_) reported 23 minutes ago

  Jack Dorsey on why Square lends to businesses banks won't even look at: "We actually see their business." Asked what data justifies extending credit to a merchant a traditional bank would reject outright, Dorsey doesn't describe a better model. He describes a better position. "They use our register. They use our payments. They enter all their employees into our system. We see all their customers. We see their competition. We have a very deep understanding of how they're doing and who they are, and we don't make a judgment until we have a pretty strong understanding to make that risk assessment." A bank sees a business through the narrow aperture of a bank statement. Square sees the register, the payroll, the customer base, and the competition. The merchant runs the whole operation on Square's rails. Dorsey states the advantage plainly: "We've built our platform in such a way that we are the tool that's being used to run the entire business. So we have an advantage that others mostly do not." Outside data exists, but it's secondary: "Outside of our walls, we look at how sellers are engaging with Yelp or Facebook or Instagram or Twitter, or all these signals that people are sending around the world." And he immediately demotes it: "A lot of our assessment comes from our own understanding, our own data itself." The same instinct, own the surface where the activity actually happens shows up in Square Cash. "It's consistently broken into the top 20 free apps in the iOS App Store, which is a huge feat for a finance app. It's consistently been the number one above our competitors, Venmo and PayPal, over the past few months." Dorsey's explanation is that they refused to accept the category they were placed in: "We haven't seen it just as peer-to-peer. We've evolved past peer-to-peer and we've observed that people are using it as a spending device. And the more ability we add and the more capabilities we add to spend it in more places, the more adoption we see and the more retention we see." The sequencing was deliberate: "We started with the most critical thing, which is sending money between two people, and then we moved on to issuing a card that could be used online and offline." Sending money between two people is a feature. It is not, on its own, a business. The card is what converts a transfer utility into something people spend from and spending is where the surface widens. Square doesn't underwrite from a credit file, because it owns the register. Cash doesn't retain users through transfers, because it moved to own the spend. Worth noting what Dorsey doesn't say. Asked directly how Square makes money on peer-to-peer transfers, he answers with rankings, adoption, and retention never revenue. Read it as a tell either way: the monetisation is the card, or it hadn't been settled yet.

• 
  Omoding (@omo_ding) reported 23 minutes ago

  @airtelmoneyug Your card cannot link with paypal. Fix that

• 
  stancia (ultrasonikz) (@WpzkxW) reported 26 minutes ago

  submitted to a label once problem, they followed up with ask for paypal but I DONT HAVE A ******* PAYPAL I DONT EVEN HAVE A GCASH THE ONLY THING I AHVE THAT SOMEWHAT RESEMBLES THAT IS MY BEEP CARD AND THATS JUST FOR BUSSES AND TRAINS AND I MOSTLY JUST GO JEEP BRUH IM SO STUPID...

• 
  sp (@spatte84) reported 27 minutes ago

  @PayPal fix your user interface I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve accidentally doubled clicked when transaction is loading only for it to submit payment before I was ready

• 
  Kevin (@Kevincreates77) reported 27 minutes ago

  The review system is gamed, and the star rating is lying to you. You see 4.6 stars and 12,000 reviews. You trust it. You shouldn't at least not at face value . Amazon has a massive fake review problem, and it goes deeper than most shoppers realize. Sellers pay for fake 5-star reviews through private Facebook groups and Telegram channels. They offer full refunds via PayPal in exchange for glowing write-ups. Some use "review clubs" where hundreds of fake buyers purchase the product, leave 5 stars, and get reimbursed. The product gets thousands of reviews in weeks, ranks higher in search, and looks legitimate to every future shopper who lands on the page. But it gets worse. Some sellers use a tactic called "review hijacking" they take an existing listing with thousands of strong reviews and swap out the product entirely. The reviews stay. The product changes. You're reading reviews for a completely different item. One former analyst described the scale: "We estimated that 30-40% of reviews in certain product categories supplements, electronics accessories, beauty had some level of manipulation. Not all outright fake, but incentivized, recycled, or merged from different product listings. The star rating was a marketing asset, not a quality metric." The counter-move: Install a browser extension like Fakespot or ReviewMeta. These tools analyze review patterns timing, language, reviewer history and give you an adjusted rating based on how many reviews appear genuine. Also, filter by "Verified Purchase" and sort by most recent. If the recent reviews are dramatically worse than the overall rating, the product has likely declined in quality while riding the coattails of old reviews.

• 
  Alice Clayne (@GlotLife) reported 29 minutes ago

  My Glitch poster arrived and it says the Animegaz arrived too... but it didn't show up yet. I'm praying it's a mistake on how its typed out on PayPal tracking. I got the poster from the door the same minute the door rang so I don't think it could of been stolen like that, idk.

• 
  Halima (@HalimaIfade) reported 30 minutes ago

  Hello @asda @Georgeatasda, I’ve been trying to check out my basket but I keep getting an error message saying there’s a problem with my payment details. I’ve tried three different payment methods, Apple Pay, my card and PayPal and I get the same error every time. I’ve also tried

• 
  Lin 💜🖤🐈‍⬛ 🇭🇰🇨🇳🇬🇧 | 🔞 | Job searching! (@LinnychuVT) reported 31 minutes ago

  Before today, I only had Stripe payments only which meant that it only allowed credit/debit cards, Google Pay, Apple Pay, etc. But now, I've also added a PayPal option as well so hopefully there won't be as many issues with payments 🫡

• 
  Hasan Aboul Hasan (@hasan_ab_hasan) reported 31 minutes ago

  You're building an app with Claude Code. a button that places an order. Claude builds it, you test it, it works! then one day someone taps it and the spinner just spins... nothing. so they tap it again. the first tap actually worked, the answer just never made it back. and no, this isn't about one slow checkout. it's about what your app does when a request succeeds and nobody hears about it. it's anything where one tap changes something on your side: → a checkout or a payment → a signup that creates an account → a "send" on a message, an email, an invite → any write your retry code might run a second time reading is safe. ask for the same page twice, you get the same page. writing isn't. run the same create twice and you've got two rows, two orders, two emails. 🧾 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝗵𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗱. 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗶𝗽𝘁 𝗴𝗼𝘁 𝗹𝗼𝘀𝘁. your code calls the API. the work goes through, the server starts writing the answer back... and your 10 second timeout fires first. your app sees an error. so does the user. but nothing got undone. the order is real, sitting in your database. nobody on your side knows it. so now three things want to try again: the user tapping the button, your retry logic, the browser resending the form. none of them know the first one landed. block 19 said only retry calls that are safe to run twice. this is how you make them safe. it has a name: 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆. long word, boring idea. an operation is idempotent when running it twice leaves things exactly the way running it once did. and if that sounds like an edge case, look at who already solved it. 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗽𝗲 built the fix into their API. you send a header with the request, 𝗜𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆-𝗞𝗲𝘆: 𝟰𝗳𝟬𝗰𝟵𝗯𝟮𝗲-..., and if Stripe sees that same key again it doesn't run the charge a second time. it hands you back the saved response from the first one, status code and all. the key is good for 𝟮𝟰 𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙧𝙨. 𝗔𝗱𝘆𝗲𝗻 uses the same header name. 𝗣𝗮𝘆𝗣𝗮𝗹 calls it PayPal-Request-Id. 𝗦𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗲 does the same when you create a payment. none of them built that for careful developers. they built it because they assume your request is going to show up twice. 🔑 𝗴𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻 𝗶𝗱, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗺𝗽𝘁 you do the same thing inside your own app. the client makes up one id when the user commits to the action, and sends that same id with every attempt. same id on the retry, same id when they tap again. your server keeps a short list of keys it has already handled, and the answer it gave back for each one. → a key it hasn't seen: do the work, save the key with the response. → a key it has seen: don't do the work. hand back the same response. so the second request never creates a second order. it merges into the first one and walks away with the original receipt. the thing people get wrong: generate that key once, up front, and reuse it. make a fresh one on every attempt and every attempt looks brand new to the server. you're right back where you started. Here's the part that matters if you build with AI. You don't have to write this code yourself. You just have to know idempotency exists, so you ask for it from day one. That's the real skill. Knowing the block is there to ask for. This is one block from the Vibe Engineering Blocks series I started recently. One post, one block. This is block number 27. This is the skill that matters today, and it's what separates dummy vibe coders from vibe engineers. And it's what lets you build real, scalable, production-ready apps with AI.

• 
  Morpheu5 Stock Watcher (@Morpheu5Watcher) reported 31 minutes ago

  PAYPAL $PYPL: WE NAMED THE WRONG CATALYST AND THE STOCK ROSE 39% ANYWAY: PayPal $PYPL at $58.85 (after hours), -$0.22 / -0.37% from Monday's $59.07 close. On June 22 this account put the San Jose payments network on the Deep-Value and Special-Situations Len5 at roughly $42.51, near 8x earnings, and named its catalyst: the 2026 reorganization into three units, with a re-rate to 12-15x as the case. Monday's close sits +$16.56 / +38.9% above that quote. The re-rate arrived. The stated reason did not. Where the move came from: on July 15, privately held Stripe and private-equity firm Advent International made an unsolicited joint offer at $60.50 a share - more than $53B, backed by about $50B of committed bank financing. The stock went $47.37 to $55.52 in one session, +$8.15 / +17.2%. That one day is 49% of everything gained since June. The offer is still unsolicited and unaccepted: no formal response from PayPal, no signed merger agreement, no closing date. The thesis check, on the July 28 print for the June quarter. Total payment volume - the dollars moving through its systems - $486.4B, +10%; net revenue $8.68B, +5%. But transaction margin dollars, what PayPal keeps from each payment after the cost of moving it, rose 1% to $3.9B (+3% ex-interest on customer balances). GAAP EPS $1.25, -3% YoY; adjusted EPS - profit per share with some items stripped - $1.38 vs about $1.28 modeled, still -1% YoY. Volume grew ten times faster than the profit line the cheap-multiple argument rested on. The reorganization is real - announced April 29, live June 2 - and has not reached the profit line. So the multiple moved without the earnings: near 11x on roughly $5.38 of guided full-year adjusted EPS, up from ~8x in June and most of the way to the 12-15x that note wanted - delivered by a bidder. The tape carries the bid's shape too: $1.43 / 2.4% up to the offer, against $11.70 / 19.8% back to the $47.37 paid the day before the news. Len5 read, all six files opened this pass. Quality-Value carries PayPal, twenty-eighth on its ranked list - that style wants a durable franchise at a fair price, and 439M active accounts plus $6.0B of buybacks over twelve months is the durable half; a signed deal at $60.50 retires the question. The Deep-Value and Special-Situations file reads as of August 4 and does not carry it - an unsigned bid is an event you cannot underwrite; a definitive agreement with a close date changes that. Momentum, Growth, and Hypergrowth are no on one fact: mid-single-digit revenue with earnings down is neither a breakout nor growth at any price. Reaccelerating transaction margin moves it. Income is out on mechanics - no dividend, buyback only. One name rising says nothing about a way of reading the market - only about that name. The stock got its re-rate. The reorganization has not earned one, and only one of those two things can be taken back by a press release.

• 
  UNDY247K (@UNDY24K) reported 32 minutes ago

  @Sevens_October let me know if the payment went thru bro. Idk y paypal sometimes give me issues with my cashapp card🤩 but I'm re excited now to finish it and prep for volume 3

• 
  Bruce in Iloilo (@BruceinIloilo) reported 33 minutes ago

  PayPal is such a pain. So many hoops. High charges. Every time I went to use it, there was some issue or glitch or something didn't work right. And now they closed my account because I did not respond to some scam. PayPal sucks

• 
  Abdelkarim (@versethera) reported 36 minutes ago

  Is PayPal dead? - down 80% in market cap since 2021 - competitors like Apple, Google and let you pay with a touch. - 3 different CEOs is 4 years Do you still use it?

• 
  Miss Skai 🦢 (@send2skaii) reported 37 minutes ago

  fix my paypal now all the sudden no ones asking for my paypal anymore smh smh

• 
  𝕆𝕞𝕒𝕣 (@o_w7jj) reported 38 minutes ago

  I have $199 currently being held in my PayPal account. I’ve contacted support several times, but the issue has not been resolved yet. I’d really appreciate your help in reviewing my case and resolving it as soon as possible. Thank you @AskPayPal

• 
  Mark Jarmuth (@JarmuthMark) reported 40 minutes ago

  @freecashcom I've tried freecash and it's a complete sham. 25% charge for PayPal cash out. Games rigged to be impossible to beat without a fortune spent on in app purchases. Rewards don't track, are devalued as players near completion and pend for 2 weeks. Surveys all have tech issues

• 
  Hanuska (@Hannuska2109) reported 43 minutes ago

  PART 5 — CREDIBILITY ENDORSEMENT Credibility endorsement happens when the reputation or authority of one person, organization or group is allowed to strengthen the credibility of somebody else — without necessarily verifying the thing for which that credibility is being used. It does not require dishonesty. It can happen entirely in good faith. And in an online fundraising community built heavily upon personal recommendations, it can happen remarkably easily. __________________________________________________ WHO DECIDES WHO IS CREDIBLE? Spend enough time in the pro-Ukraine fundraising world on X and you begin to recognize the signals. Trusted fundraiser. Scambuster. Investigator. Vetted. Verified. Then come the associations. Known fundraisers. Military units. Soldiers. Commanders. Charities. Established organisations. Prominent accounts. Each association can add another layer of reassurance. And eventually a perfectly reasonable human shortcut develops: ---------------------------------------------------------- “PEOPLE I TRUST TRUST THIS PERSON.” There is nothing irrational about that. None of us can independently investigate everybody we encounter. The danger comes when: “People I trust this person” quietly becomes: “THIS PERSON HAS BEEN VERIFIED.” Those are not the same thing. TOONIE TUESDAY Consider Lorelei. Toonie Tuesday publicly promoted a fundraiser involving Lorelei and described her as: “THE ULTIMATE SCAMBUSTER.” That is useful contemporaneous evidence of how Lorelei was being presented to the community. An established fundraising initiative wasn't merely interacting with her. It was publicly attaching a description to her: Scambuster. That word carries an implication. A scambuster identifies scams. A scambuster investigates questionable people. A scambuster is somebody whose judgement about potential fraud should presumably carry weight. But it isn't a professional qualification. There is no examination required to become a Twitter scambuster. No licence. No regulatory body. No published evidential standard somebody must satisfy before adopting the description. Yet when an established fundraising initiative publicly describes somebody as “the ultimate scambuster,” its own reputation inevitably adds weight to that description. -------------------------------------------------------- CREDIBILITY HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED. That doesn't mean Toonie Tuesday did anything improper. It demonstrates the mechanism. -------------------------------------------------------- ANDREW PERPETUA @AndrewPerpetua Andrew Perpetua provides an even clearer example — because he has publicly described how the same mechanism operated around Dmytro. According to Andrew, he was initially: “HIGHLY SUS” of Dmytro. That matters. Andrew wasn't describing blind trust. He had doubts. So he did what most reasonable people would consider sensible: He asked people he trusted. According to Andrew, he asked numerous people in the Ukrainian military about Dmytro. And: “SEVERAL VERY ENTHUSIASTICALLY SAID HE WAS LEGIT.” So Andrew supported him. Then the allegations exploded. And Andrew was angry. Not merely because of what was being alleged about Dmytro. He was angry at people who, in his view, subsequently behaved as though Dmytro's problems had always been obvious. His earlier post makes that frustration unmistakable: “If you thought he was a fraud, you should have said so.” That presents us with an extraordinarily important question. WHAT WAS ANDREW SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE? He had doubts & checked. People he considered credible vouched for Dmytro. He adjusted his opinion accordingly. The weakness wasn't necessarily Andrew's judgement. The weakness was the verification mechanism itself. Because Andrew had not established: “Dmytro's fundraising has been independently financially verified.” What he had actually established was: “PEOPLE I TRUST SAY DMYTRO IS LEGIT.” Again: Those are not the same thing. WHO VERIFIED THE VERIFIERS? Suppose a Ukrainian soldier tells Andrew: “Dmytro is legitimate. He helped my unit.” The soldier may be telling the absolute truth. Perhaps Dmytro delivered a vehicle. Perhaps he delivered equipment. Perhaps he personally risked his life doing it. That establishes something meaningful. But did that soldier examine Dmytro's PayPal records? Did they reconcile donations against purchases? Did they establish where every vehicle originated? Did they determine whether an asset was donated before money was subsequently raised for it? Probably not. So the soldier can be completely honest. Andrew can be completely reasonable in relying upon them. Dmytro can genuinely have helped that soldier. And yet the financial question can remain completely unanswered. Nobody necessarily lied. THE CREDIBILITY SIMPLY TRAVELLED FURTHER THAN THE EVIDENCE. ---------------------------------------------------- THIS IS WHY HINDSIGHT MATTERS Once allegations become widely accepted, reputation can change astonishingly quickly. People who were once publicly trusted become people whom: “Everybody knew” couldn't be trusted. People who once vouched for somebody remember their doubts more clearly than their endorsements. Old warnings are rediscovered. Old associations become uncomfortable. And eventually history can begin to look much cleaner than it actually was. That is why contemporary posts matter. They tell us what people were saying before everyone knew what they now say everybody knew. Andrew's posts matter for precisely that reason. They preserve the uncomfortable middle: “I WAS SUSPICIOUS. I ASKED. PEOPLE VOUCHED FOR HIM. I BELIEVED THEM.” That is far more informative than hindsight. -------------------------------------------------------- DANIEL ASHER Another voice from within the broader community expressed the underlying problem remarkably well: “THAT'S THE WRONG DEFAULT SETTING FOR A COMMUNITY THAT OUGHT TO ACT ON EVIDENCE IT HAS.” That sentence takes us beyond Dmytro, Lorelei, Andrew or Toonie Tuesday. Because ultimately this isn't simply a problem with individuals. IT IS A SYSTEM PROBLEM. A community raising significant amounts of humanitarian money inevitably requires trust. But trust cannot become its verification system. Reputation is not verification. Association is not verification. Endorsement is not verification. And neither is a title somebody has acquired within an online community. --------------------------------------------------------- REPUTATION SHOULD TELL US WHERE TO START — NOT WHERE TO STOP A fundraiser with years of successful deliveries deserves to have that history considered. A volunteer trusted by soldiers deserves to have that considered. An organisation with a strong track record deserves to have that considered. But when somebody asks a specific factual question: How much was raised? What was purchased? What did it cost? Who paid for it? Where did it come from? Who received it? the answer cannot be: “LOOK WHO TRUSTS ME.” That answers a different question. And this is why credibility washing matters. Because the people lending their credibility may be completely honest. The person receiving that credibility may have genuinely earned much of their reputation. The association itself may be completely legitimate. The mistake happens when that credibility is allowed to prove something it never actually verified. So perhaps we have been asking the wrong question. Not: “WHO DO WE TRUST?” but: “WHAT CAN WE VERIFY?” That standard applies to Dmytro, Lorelei, people investigating and it applies to us. --------------------------------------------------------- Trust should make verification easier. It should never make verification unnecessary. ---------------------------------------------------------

• 
  proxy for korea japan online & offline kpop anime (@wendyproxy) reported 48 minutes ago

  proxy 2026 CORTIS TOUR <PUT YOUR PHONE DOWN> BIRTHDAY PARTY POP-UP 📅 ~08/17 🛒proxy fee 5000 won ea 💳 wise and paypal only 📦domestic shipping and ww 📍korea offline #wendyproxy 양도 wts wtb

• 
  Tiffany Kristen (@TiffanyKri99602) reported 49 minutes ago

  @soupgal1 Dm me with your cash app tag 🏷 or PayPal if you have any financial issues to get paid and say(PAY ME)

• 
  💖 (@SpicyAmbs) reported 55 minutes ago

  I am selling the Aranara pet code for NA server (crunchyroll collab) if anyone is interested $15 USD PayPal only thanks. #genshin #genshinimpact

• 
  Warmaster (@MrAntiHero1) reported 56 minutes ago

  @Vicer0yal I am not seeing anything pop up at all in paypal or ko-fi so not sure what the issue is tbh. I appreciate it anyways though.

• 
  Johnny Pisshead (@JohnnyP9446) reported 60 minutes ago

  @Google you also have my paypal account info witch should be the same as using a "f"ing credit card so fix it or i sue