Skip to main content
Back
Mar 30, 2026

Google $700M Google Play Store Settlement Over Alleged Antitrust App Billing Fees

Settlement Image

The Google $700M Google Play Store Settlement Over Alleged Antitrust App Billing Fees settlement offers $700M in total, with individual payouts of TBD+ to eligible claimants who made a qualifying purchase through google play billing. The deadline to file is February 19, 2026. Proof of purchase is not required.

Deadline
0 days remaining

Deadline: February 19, 2026

Total Settlement Amount
$700M

Total amount allocated for all claims

Individual Payout Range
TBD+

Estimated amount per eligible claim

Proof of Purchase
Not Required

No proof of purchase needed — anyone eligible can file a claim

No documentation is generally required because eligibility and payment amounts are expected to be calculated from Google Play transaction records. If a consumer cannot receive an automatic PayPal/Venmo payment and later uses the supplemental claims process, they may need to verify identity and provide updated contact information so past purchases can be matched.

Settlement Summary

A coalition of 53 state and territorial attorneys general accused Google of using its control over the Google Play Store—the main default app marketplace on most Android phones—to stifle competition and inflate prices for consumers. The states alleged that Google made it difficult for rival app stores to gain traction, steered developers toward Google Play Billing, and imposed commissions that were often as high as 30% on many paid apps, subscriptions, and in‑app purchases—costs developers could pass along through higher prices or fewer discounts. Google denies wrongdoing, but agreed to a $700 million settlement covering qualifying Google Play Billing purchases made from August 16, 2016 through September 30, 2023, with $630 million earmarked for consumer restitution (often paid automatically, typically at least $2, with larger amounts based on spending) and $70 million going to the states for penalties and costs, subject to court approval. The lawsuit was filed under state and federal antitrust principles that target conduct used to maintain monopoly power or unlawfully restrain trade, and it matters because it challenges the “gatekeeper” role of dominant app stores in the digital economy. Beyond the cash fund, the settlement requires operational changes aimed at boosting competition: allowing developers to communicate about cheaper options and alternative billing, permitting alternative in‑app billing in the U.S., making it easier to install and use third‑party app stores, and limiting penalties that could discourage device makers or carriers from preinstalling competing stores—paired with compliance monitoring so states can check follow‑through. This case fits into a broader wave of scrutiny of platform fees and app-store rules across the tech industry, echoing disputes over Apple’s App Store policies and other actions targeting Google, including major government cases about search and ad-tech dominance. Regulators worldwide have increasingly focused on whether app stores function like essential infrastructure—where rules about ranking, warnings, payment systems, and commissions can shape competition—leading to settlements, court orders, and new digital competition regimes that pressure platforms to open up distribution and payments without compromising security or user privacy.

Entities Involved

Google
Google Play Store
Google Play Billing
Android
PayPal
Venmo
Coalition of 53 state and territory attorneys general
New York Attorney General
Letitia James
U.S. Department of Justice
Google Play State AG Antitrust Litigation (settlement website)

Related Topics

Google Play settlement
Google Play Store antitrust settlement
Google Play Billing refund
Android app purchase settlement
in-app purchase settlement
Google Play class action payout
PayPal Venmo settlement payment
Google Play Store monopoly allegations
app store competition settlement
state AG Google Play settlement
Google Play reimbursement
Google Play subscription settlement
how to opt out Google Play settlement
Google Play restitution fund
Google Play qualifying purchase

Eligibility Requirements

  • Made a qualifying purchase through Google Play Billing
  • Purchase occurred between August 16, 2016 and September 30, 2023
  • Consumer is included in Google’s settlement records (generally based on Google Play transaction data)
  • Did not opt out (request exclusion) by February 19, 2026
  • Able to receive payment via PayPal or Venmo tied to the email/phone on the Google Play account, or later use the supplemental claims process if automatic payment fails

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest settlement updates and news.

Important Notice About Filing Claims

Submitting false information in a settlement claim is considered perjury and will result in your claim being rejected. Fraudulent claims harm legitimate class members and may result in legal consequences.

If you are unsure about your eligibility for this settlement, please visit the official settlement administrator’s website using the link provided above. Review the eligibility criteria carefully before submitting a claim.

Class Action Champion is an independent information resource and is not affiliated with any settlement administrator, law firm, or court. We provide settlement information as a service to help connect eligible class members with legitimate settlements.

Related Settlements

Absolute Dental Group $3.3 Million Settlement for 2025 Data Breach Losses

Absolute Dental Group LLC agreed to pay a $3.3 million class action settlement over a potential 2025 data breach affecting consumers’ personal information. The incident occurred between Feb. 19, 2025 and March 5, 2025, when unauthorized access may have exposed data. Eligible U.S. residents who received notice from Absolute Dental about the incident may claim up to $5,000 for documented losses and may also receive a pro rata cash payment, with certain California residents eligible for an enhanced amount.

Travelers PIP Settlement for New Jersey Claims Up to 70 or More for Deductible Reductions

A class action settlement totaling at least the net settlement fund (with attorneys’ fees up to $275,000 and service awards of $7,500) resolves allegations that Travelers and St. Paul improperly reduced New Jersey PIP coverage limits by counting deductibles and copayments, causing some insureds to receive less than the PIP benefits available. Eligible policyholders (and certain heirs/representatives) who received final PIP payments between April 14, 2017 and April 1, 2023 that were within $3,000 of their policy limit—but not the full limit—may receive an automatic $70 and possibly additional compensation.

MUBI $1.6 Million Settlement for California Auto-Renewal Without Notice

California subscribers of the MUBI streaming service may be eligible for a $1.6 million class action settlement over alleged auto-renewal charges without adequate notice or proper consent. The claims cover sign-ups beginning April 1, 2021 and auto-renewals occurring through May 31, 2025, as described in Cesar Cejudo v. MUBI, Inc. To be eligible, claimants must have been California residents whose subscription renewed at least once and who did not receive a full refund of renewal charges.

MetLife $1.2 Million Settlement for Underinsured Motorist Coverage Offsets in New Mexico

Metropolitan Direct Property and Casualty Insurance Co. (MetLife) agreed to pay $1.2 million to settle claims that it misrepresented or failed to disclose underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage limits and used improper offsets. The issue relates to New Mexico auto insurance activity between Oct. 1, 2010, and Jan. 31, 2022. Eligible class members include qualifying policyholders who had UM/UIM claim offsets by at-fault payments or who purchased UM/UIM coverage in that period.