
Stripe Chargeback Protection - shedside
https://stripe.com/radar/chargeback-protection
======
jasonkester
But this isn't the product I want.

I don't want to ever fight chargebacks. Because my policy is to never take
money from people who don't want to give it to me. I want to automatically
_refund_ every chargeback attempt without it affecting my ability to charge
credit cards.

One of my businesses targets consumers, who have this amazing ability to
"forget to cancel" or to have "cancelled 3 months ago, but for some reason
we're still billing them" or to just plain decide that the last six months of
charges were fraudulent and that their bank should get them reversed.

All of that is fine with me, and in fact every invoice I send out says as
much: We'll happily refund every penny you ever paid us if you simply ask. But
lots of people aren't comfortable asking for their money back. They are,
however, plenty comfortable asking their _bank_ to ask for their money back.

I just want a way to streamline that process that doesn't involve me having to
handle fighting disputes that I'd prefer to lose. And of course to not have
those lost "disputes" count against me.

Any ideas on how to do that, Stripe?

~~~
eeke
We can send you a webhook on every dispute being created
([https://stripe.com/docs/webhooks](https://stripe.com/docs/webhooks)) and you
could use the API to either refund the underlying charge or accept the dispute
(and refund the underlying charge).

We can also give you access to receiving early fraud warnings from issuers
(like Visa TC40s). These are notifications from the issuers that the customer
is likely going to dispute a charge. If you're happy proactively refunding
customers you could do so without incurring the dispute fee (though TC40s and
the MasterCard equivalent can still count towards monitoring programs). Let me
know if you're interested (eeke@stripe.com).

This gets you most of what you want. The subtleties:

1) The credit card ecosystem wants to discourage chargebacks as a routine
mechanism for canceling, and so there will still be a fee assessed by the
networks and hence by us.

2) The credit card networks have thresholds for how many chargebacks a
customer can be doing while making responsible use of their rails, and if one
routinely exceeds that, they will give a very serious warning to change
business practices and, if one’s numbers do not improve, they will terminate
one’s access to the rails. We have substantial experience with B2B SaaS
businesses and it is _extraordinarily_ unlikely that a B2B SaaS business comes
close to those thresholds, even after accounting for unfortunate user
behavior.

~~~
jasonkester
How does that work? When I'm notified of a dispute, the first thing I do is go
in and refund the charge. I still have to watch the whole dispute resolution
process play out and have it be ruled against me.

How would I go about stopping it before it starts, as you seem to imply is
possible?

Edit to add: Does it even make a difference if I go in and refund the disputed
payments? It sounds like I get dinged either way and the customer gets their
money back either way. Should I save myself the effort?

~~~
eeke
Card issuers are often able to detect that a transaction is fraudulent before
it is disputed, and when this happens, they will send us a notification. These
notifications are commonly called TC40s (Visa) or SAFE reports (MasterCard).
On average ~60% of early fraud warnings end up being disputed, and most
disputes have an early fraud warning (though there’s a wide range depending on
your business). If you refund these charges before they become disputes, you
can avoid the dispute entirely. It doesn't solve all dispute problems but it
can be pretty effective. I’m happy to take a look at your account to calculate
what percent of disputes have an early fraud warning.

~~~
michaelt

      Card issuers are often able to detect
      that a transaction is fraudulent before
      it is disputed, and when this happens,
      they will send us a notification.
    

Is there a mechanism like that but in the reverse direction? i.e. if a seller
detects someone testing stolen cards, and wants to alert the card issuer all
those cards are stolen?

~~~
michaelmior
Shouldn't the issuer be able to figure this out on their own when they see the
attempted charges coming in? It seems like the resources of the issuer would
be better spent improving their own detection rather than dealing with third-
party reports.

~~~
michaelt
Retailers might enjoy better information (account history, items in basket and
suchlike), might have already borne the cost of manually checking the order,
or might have better incentives (as it's them who loses money if an order was
placed with a stolen card)

After all, if the issuer had been able to figure it out, the payments would
have failed preauthorisation.

------
nickjj
How did you arrive at 0.4%? That seems like a lot to pay for insurance.

If they take 2.9% normally, 0.4% is about 14% extra in fees for every
transaction you make, but disputes on a legitimate product are probably 1 in
5,000 (and Stripe will charge you a $15 flat fee if you lose the dispute which
you will if it was related due to credit card fraud).

If you sell 5,000 products at $50 that's $250,000 in revenue. Stripe would
normally take 2.9% which is $7,250 but now with "fraud production" they would
take 3.3% for $8,250. So you've just spent an extra $1,000 out of pocket to
save yourself $15 in a dispute fee that Stripe charges you. That's really
steep.

If you had 66 fraud charges within 5,000x $50 transactions (to break even on
fees), I would really look into why you're getting so many disputes. That's
astronomically high.

~~~
amirhirsch
The value is there is you have greater than 1 in 250 transactions charged-
backed and lose. This is high, but certainly within the range -- consider that
Signifyd has business for their chargeback protection at a 1% rate. Of course
Stripe has more data for better risk modeling....so perhaps Stripe should not
be allowed to charge for additional charge-back protection services since it
implies they now have a dis-incentive to prevent charge-backs for customers
who aren't paying extra.

~~~
nickjj
I guess I'm out of touch on what it is like for physical products.

I only sell digital products but the dispute rate is over an order of
magnitude less than 1 in 250.

~~~
amirhirsch
I sell a physical product on a Shopify store. Charge-backs cost me $8000 out
of >$3,000,000 revenue (14 orders out of 11362). At least one of them
(totaling $2000) I should have known was fraudulent because I even asked for
photo ID confirmation and received a scan of a print-out which I didn't check
well enough.

I simply started to require PayPal for international customers instead of
Stripe checkout and that reduced fraud to zero.

(edit: PayPal fees are like 4.4% for international, but it's cheaper than
using something like Signifyd on-demand which takes 4% on top)

~~~
nickjj
Thanks for sharing real numbers.

So you would have paid $12,000 to Stripe for charge back insurance, which is
double what you really paid (well, it's not double since you really paid 8k,
but from the sounds of it that 2k loss could have likely been prevented with a
more careful background check which makes it a 6k loss).

Question: would you pay that extra $4,000 to $6,000 to never have to deal with
charge backs again?

~~~
amirhirsch
No. I evaluated Signifyd and the truth is that it wasn't worth it economically
or from a "never have to deal with charge backs" perspective, because I still
have to deal with the operational errors that cause most of my charge-backs.

When you sell a physical product, usually you get "friendly" charge-backs
because the customer didn't receive the product. This means something is wrong
with your logistics like a package went missing or didn't get sent out. Often
you also missed the messages from the customer wondering where the order went
---saying they will contact their credit card company if they don't hear back
from you. So you can't just not deal with that.

------
ijidak
This is huge! Our business sales registrations to educational events for a
specific industry. We use Stripe to process.

We have a strict non-refundable policy on ticket deposits because, otherwise,
we can't determine how many seats are left for each event and we lose the
revenue on that empty seat.

We often get unscrupulous customers who claim they don't recognize the charge
because they decided not to attend in the 11th hour!

We also have the rare individual who completes the entire 3-day training and
then claims they never got the service!

Because it's in-person training, it's hard to prove they received the service.
For example, there are no postal records we might show as proof that we
shipped a physical item and it was received.

Now, we have them sign a document affirming they got the training prior to
receiving their certificates.

But, still, Chargebacks are stressful, because they create revenue and profit
uncertainty for each event.

The dollar value of our fraud rate is about .3-.7% per event. But we always
fear the outlier event, where that number spikes. For example, we set aside 2%
of revenue from our most recent event (which is thousands of dollars now tied
up) to prepare for any unanticipated spike in chargebacks.

And... the stress and frustration of fraudulent chargebacks is a non-zero
intangible cost.

I will gladly pay .4% to get revenue certainty!

At this time we don't use checkout though. So will need to look into what we
need to do to change to that.

I believe we're using Stripe Elements. (I'm the business owner and a
programmer, but I didn't code our original stripe integration.)

Will be looking at this today!!!

Thank you so much for your work on this feature! This is a real game changer
for businesses like mine!

~~~
Meekro
Have you looked into 3D secure? Stripe already offers it[1], no fees, and it
mitigates liability quite a bit. Lots of business owners here probably can't
use it because they do recurring billing, but it sounds like it'd be perfect
for you.

"Should a 3D Secure payment be disputed as fraudulent by the cardholder, the
liability shifts from you to the card issuer. These types of disputes are
handled internally, do not appear in the Dashboard, and do not result in funds
being withdrawn from your Stripe account."

[1]
[https://stripe.com/docs/payments/3d-secure](https://stripe.com/docs/payments/3d-secure)

~~~
ijidak
Interesting. Thank you for the suggestion.

Just took a look at 3D Sure. My only concern would be the drop in conversions.

I wonder what the typical drop in conversions is with this enabled.

I have a sense it could be high single digits to low double-digits (e.g.
7-11%).

In which case, that would cost quite a bit more.

I did see there is a way to trigger this as needed.

Hmmm...If we could figure out a way to identify high risk individuals in
advance, that might mitigate the drop in conversion.

Hmmm... Maybe a fun machine learning side project.

------
globile
Things like this are great for the average to small merchant, BUT if you're
processing more than, say, 50,000 USD a month, relying heavily on the Stripe
ecosystem can take its toll and can cost you big time.

\- Use Stripe as the only gateway for all your international traffic, and you
will see alarming drops in acceptance rates, meaning the chance of
successfully charging a Mexican customer in Mexico with a US Stripe account is
much lower than if you have a local acquirer. By a lot!

\- Rely heavily and blindly on Stripe Radar for post-charge suspected fraud
alerts charges, and you will be refunding many valid orders.

\- If you go all in with Stripe Checkout, you are getting a lot of good stuff
at a price. If stripe dynamically uses 3DS to sift potential fraud users, you
are going to hurt your conversion rates.

Been a big fan of Stripe for a long time, but when order volume goes up, and
you grow internationally you have to consider other alternatives and/or backup
plans, such as smart routing, local merchants, alert networks (ethoca,
verifi), pre-checking for pseudo 3DS charges (no auth need, but fully
protected, etc)

Not taking into account these 3 things, can drop your conversions by big
double digit percentages.

EDIT: spelling

~~~
eeke
Thanks for your comment. We want our products to substantially decrease the
barriers to international commerce, and they’re used by both businesses which
are just getting started up to multinational companies with extremely
sophisticated understanding of their payments needs.

Auth rates are a deep topic, and one we’re experimenting on constantly.

The topic of whether a particular business will get better auth rates going
through a local gateway is a complicated one (that is probably true of many
businesses and not true of many businesses); we’re working on making this sort
of thing unnecessary for most businesses to think about. Philosophically,
centralizing this sort of work at Stripe makes a lot of sense to us; we can
deploy more engineers against auth rates than any Stripe customer could
because we have a much larger surface area for improvement than any customer
does.

Many of our users want something which works out of the box, and they’re the
target audience for Checkout. If you want to rigorously test the behavior
against your sophisticated understanding of conversions in your own business,
that’s awesome; you can see exactly which transactions we flagged for being on
the fence using the API.

It’s always a balancing act to make things which work out-of-the-box for
someone’s first business on it’s first day and still have the power and
configurability expected by extremely sophisticated operators. Getting this
balance right is extremely important to us.

~~~
Meekro
Thank you for your many detailed replies here! This idea that parent brought
up is one I've heard before: Stripe declines payments that a local gateway
service would have accepted, for reasons unrelated to fraud protection. That's
always made me scratch my head because my (admittedly primitive) understanding
is that you're eventually hitting some API at the bank which accepts or
declines the charge. Why would it matter whether it's Stripe hitting it or
some other gateway? I assume Stripe has more resources to attack such problems
than your average Mexican gateway provider, so there must be some intractable
problem in there somewhere?

~~~
base
We switched from stripe to local payment gateways in some countries because
some banks automatically convert any charge by stripe to USD making it more
expensive for the end client and refusing in some cases the charge, when in
local gateways everything goes through in the local currency.

Additionaly stripe charges their 2.5% to 3% + 2% conversion fee making it
impossible some business models that are low margin.

------
eeke
I’m the PM on Chargeback Protection. Startups told us they don’t want to deal
with the hassle and unpredictability of chargebacks; that’s why we built this.
Happy to answer any questions you have.

~~~
czzarr
0.4% is an extremely steep price for a company like mine doing over $2.5m in
annual turnover (saas) which has a very low fraud rate. I actually think
currently we pay less than that by doing nothing (meaning letting Paypal
handle it, and losing every case). However I'd gladly pay a few thousands per
year for it, or be able to pay it on selected transactions (only US for
instance).

~~~
burnte
Then this offering isn't cost effective for you and you can ignore it. I'm not
sure I understand why this thread is full of people complaining it doesn't
solve a problem this solution isn't targeting, or, like you, saying this costs
more than simply accepting your low chargeback rate. When I rent a car, I
decline the offer for me being able to return the car without gas because for
me, it's trivial and cheaper for me to refill the car. I don't complain that
the price should be lower, or that they should instead be offering sunroofs on
more cars.

~~~
unreal37
And I'm the opposite. I return the car empty every time, because the cost of
"finding a gas station" when you're in a hurry to catch a flight isn't worth
the extra $X they charge for the service to fill it. Choices are great!

------
shedside
Don't know if anyone from Stripe is listening here but: it'd be amazing to be
able to deploy chargeback protection selectively, as a Radar rule. So that for
example we could say: charges from the US are protected (and subject to the
extra fee) while charges from the UK are not.

~~~
flibble
That’s exactly what we’d like. 95% of our transactions come from trusted
customers which have ~0% chance of a chargeback. We’d like to apply this check
and insurance on only the transactions that we are not sure about.

Requiring it to be all or nothing makes the feature useless (not cost
effective) for merchants with a low fraud rates.

~~~
shoo_pl
Is it not the point? If stripe allowed you to do that - insure only dangerous
transactions - then it could not be 0.4% but rather a few %.

The entire point behind insurance is to have enough volume so that the small %
when they need to pay up won't affect the business.

~~~
ben509
Adverse selection inflates premiums, simply because people who need insurance
are the ones who buy it.

The point of insurance is to transfer* risk to the insurer. The insurer does
that by identifying a group that is homogenous enough that their premiums are
just slightly over the payouts.

So an insurer can improve competitiveness by selling multiple products that
cover different risk groups. I imagine that for Stripe, the risk variance
falls in a fairy narrow band: bounded at the low end by not being worth
insuring, and bounded at the high end by merchants losing their account.

* As opposed to say retaining risk, e.g. you don't buy collision on a beater.

------
jliptzin
Has anyone done the math on this? You’re paying an extra 0.4% fees per txn
which is a lot. So your dispute loss rate would have to be > 0.4% for this to
make sense. That seems pretty high. That probably means your overall dispute
rate is above 0.6%. In my experience you can get your dispute rate well below
0.1% (effectively a non-issue) by making sure your support channels are
working and not clogged, and you have a generous refund policy (and of course
being honest about pricing and billing, especially for subscriptions).

To me this seems like knowing about a small leak in your basement, but instead
of fixing it, you buy a basement water damage insurance policy.

~~~
xpose2000
So, .4% fee for $10,000 in sales amounts to $40. And losing one chargeback
dispute costs you $15, plus time and effort to fill it in and submit it. Not
to sound cynical, but odds are you will probably lose it anyways because the
customer didn't feel like paying anymore.

Am I missing something? The chargeback protection fee doesn't sound terrible

~~~
jliptzin
Yes I do lose most disputes regardless of what the situation is, and I did
forget about the $15 fee. I guess it really depends on the type of business,
will probably make sense for some, but as a consumer I do see a lot of small
businesses out there that should be looking first at how to get their
chargeback rate low enough that they don’t need something like this in the
first place.

~~~
penagwin
I believe it's happened before where people have setup bot accounts to buy
game licenses from indie developers, just to resell the keys on G2A/Kinguin.
However they do it with stolen credit cards, so the indie developers get hit
with a 15$ charge PER order. If there's 1,000 keys, that's 15,000$ in
chargeback fees.

So it might be reverse, it might be a no brainer to accept this extra
protection because like you said, 40$ fee @10,000 isn't that big of a deal,
given only 3 chargeback fees are necessary to break even. Unless you can
REALLY manage your chargebacks. If your product costs 20$, so 500 people buy
it, you only need a .6% chargeback rate before you should've taken the extra
protection.

------
necubi
Chargeback insurance/protection is not new in the industry. And despite how
nice it sounds to not have to worry about chargebacks, I think it's a bad deal
for almost everybody.

The basic problem is that your incentives are not aligned with Stripe's: you
make money when a good sale goes through, but that's when Stripe might lose
money (if the transaction ends up being fraudulent). So they have an incentive
to block any marginal orders, which means you lose revenue and suffer
reputational harm of blocking good users.

Then there's the price: companies with a good fraud protection system /
process typically keep chargebacks <0.1%. (For large companies, this means
using something like Sift or Accertify along with a fraud review team, for
smaller businesses it might just mean manually reviewing every order). So
you're paying a lot for the convenience.

[Disclaimer: Used to work on fraud protection at Sift]

~~~
maratc
That's why anti-fraud-as-a-service companies only charge the commission when
they approve the transaction, while the declines are free. If everything is
declined, they are not making any money.

[Disclaimer: Used to work at anti-fraud-as-a-service company, acquired by a
payment behemoth long since]

------
Gluten
Used to run an online game, where lots of fraud was going on. People would buy
ingame coins or whatever, move them elsewhere and then chargeback. Full
protection at just 0.4% would have been a dream for me if I still operated
that game.

~~~
jliptzin
Stripe are not idiots, if they’re losing a significant amount of money on this
offering to a specific merchant, they’re going to close your account.

~~~
slips
Is that stated anywhere by Stripe or is it theoretical?

~~~
ceejayoz
> We may terminate this Agreement or close your Stripe Account at any time for
> any reason (including, without limitation, for any activity that may create
> harm or loss to the goodwill of a Payment Method) by providing you Notice.

------
temp129038
Interesting - I've been following bolt.com, which seems to guarantee zero
chargebacks as well. Given Stripe's scale I now wonder why the value add for
Bolt over Stripe is supposed to be now.

------
crazygringo
Genuine question: how can this make financial sense for Stripe?

If Stripe charges 0.4% for it... then presumably any business with chargebacks
of <0.4% value won't bother to use it (except for rare cases of needing to
reduce risk on extreme low volume of high value items), so mostly only
businesses with chargebacks of >0.4% value will use it...

...so almost by definition the mean cost will be greater than what Stripe is
charging, and Stripe will lose money.

Since Stripe is full of smart people... what am I missing here? How is this a
viable product?

~~~
dexterdog
Many business <.4% will use it because it takes a job off of somebody's plate
and these will tend to be larger customers. Small places that deal with a
chargeback or two per week are not going to bother.

------
thom801
I just have to point out this little page of caveats:
[https://support.stripe.com/questions/payments-that-
qualify-f...](https://support.stripe.com/questions/payments-that-qualify-for-
chargeback-protection)

Biggest thing for our company: "The payment must be submitted to Stripe by
your customer via Stripe Checkout. This means that recurring charges are not
eligible for Chargeback Protection"

Meaning this does not protect our B2C subscription company from any recurring
charges which is a huge percentage of our charges if not all of them.

Also: "The dispute must be one of the following types of reason codes (as
identified by the relevant Card Network) listed in Appendix 1 of the Terms of
Service: Visa: 10.4 Other Fraud - Card Absent Environment Mastercard: 4837 No
Cardholder Authorization Mastercard: 4840 Fraudulent Processing of
Transactions Discover, Diners Club, JCB: UA01 Fraud Card Not Present
Transaction American Express: FR2 Fraud Full Recourse Program American
Express: FR4 Fraud Full Recourse Agreement American Express: F29 Fraudulent
Transaction - Card Not Present American Express: 4534 Multiple Records of
Charge (ROCs); Card Member denies participation in Charge American Express:
4540 Card Not Present; Card Member denies participation in Charge"

Many of our chargebacks fall outside of these chargeback reasons so it would
likely not be worth it for us to use this feature, as I'm sure is the case for
many other subscription based companies.

~~~
tyrree612yyuh
> The payment must be submitted to Stripe by your customer via Stripe
> Checkout. This means that recurring charges are not eligible for Chargeback
> Protection

What's going on here? I thought Checkout specifically supported setting up
subscriptions:

[https://stripe.com/docs/payments/checkout/migration#client-s...](https://stripe.com/docs/payments/checkout/migration#client-
subscriptions)

If recurring charges are not covered that's fine I guess but I don't get what
it has to do with Checkout.

~~~
patio11
You’re right that wasn’t very clear. If the subscription is started using
Stripe Checkout and charged at sign up, the initial payment is protected by
Chargeback Protection. Trials that are charged at a later time and future
recurring payments are not protected. We want to broaden the scope of use
cases for Chargeback Protection over time.

------
kmfrk
It'd be great to see Stripe adopted by donation platforms for livestreaming
like Streamlabs and StreamElements, chargebacks remain an awful abuse vector
there.

~~~
judge2020
Didn't Paypal add a TOS clause (or something along those lines) that prevented
donations from being valid for chargeback?

~~~
kmfrk
PayPal ran into some bad PR a while ago with people making "fake" donations to
the tune of thousands of dollars and ended up refusing the chargebacks. But as
far as structural change, things are still pretty bad.

Streamlabs's tutorial on chargebacks was updated as recently as a month ago:
[https://support.streamlabs.com/hc/en-
us/articles/11500601766...](https://support.streamlabs.com/hc/en-
us/articles/115006017667-I-Just-Received-a-Chargeback-What-Now-).

------
dulse
Congratulations!! Love the philosophy around the product and the dynamic
treatment of higher risk transactions with Checkout routing to 3DS.

It must feel great to be able to support such a "simple" product, as I know
there must be a ton of complexity under the hood enabling the simple form
factor.

------
docker_up
0.4% seems high when a sustained rate of 1% will get you kicked off VISA and
Mastercard anyway.

------
andrewbarba
This appears to require the new Checkout product in order to enable it. What
happens if we have a percentage of sales coming from a native iOS or Android
app? Are we not allowed to enable protection? Or would just the web
transactions be covered?

~~~
eeke
(PM for Chargeback Protection.) Yep, Chargeback Protection only works with the
new Checkout so we’ll only protect any transactions that are processed through
the new Checkout. You can keep your existing integration for iOS and Android,
but those charges will not be protected.

------
smoovb
Does this mean Stripe will change its allowed merchants? We sell digital
telecom products and Stripe does not accept our business. This would be a
product we could use, but can't if they are still rigid about their accepted
business.

~~~
edubs25
Is stripe actually the one blocking you? Card brands regulate which MCCs are
allowed to be signed on by acquirers. It could be Visa, Amex or Mastercard.

------
ricberw
Gosh, I’d love to use this for accepting cards for our $29k device, but the
limit in the US is $25k in protection for the entire year.

We offer a hardware product with SAAS after purchase, and we have dozens of
customers insist on paying for that hardware with a credit card (albeit we
won’t accept one now because of the inherent risks of accepting a card).

If the limit was much higher, I’d be sold, and our volume with Stripe could go
up by $1m/year.

------
donniefitz2
Would this cover a marketplace scenario? For instance, we use Connect and
transfer a purchase balance to our Connect account users after a purchase is
made. If we encounter a chargeback, we also have to come up with the full cost
of the item sold to cover the loss because the seller has already been paid.
I'm wondering if this new service would cover that scenario.

------
tarsinge
In France to my knowledge we don’t have a right to chargebacks, the only case
when we can be reimbursed is when a fraudulent use of our card is made and we
then declare a credit card number theft and the card is blocked. How is the
situation in other European countries?

~~~
bjonathan
I run an ecommerce website in France, and I use Stripe (french account), and I
get a couple of chargebacks per year. Usually, it's the customer who gets his
CC stolen, blocks it and declares all the transactions in the timeframe as
fraudulent.

FWIW, I have had 10 chargebacks and lost the dispute for each of them even
with the delivery address matching the CC name and the proof of delivery...
But I will pass on this protection, the price is way too high for us.

------
johnsmitty
Why limit this to Checkout? Checkout seems limited and resides on Stripe's
servers. Who wants to be redirected from a secure website to another domain???
Outside of web savvy people, nobody has ever heard of Stripe.com.

------
sfmike
hmm if your chargeback rate is 1% or less, this costs more then a 15 dollar
chargeback anyways. at 100 AOV at 1% cback that's 40 dollars to cover what
would have been 15 dollar chargeback. also if your description photos and
tracking are on point there should be no chargeback you can't win, unless your
processes are off.

Big agreement on the just refund vs chargeback and effect possible merchant
rate increase or suspension. Would rather cut into profits a bit then have
headaches of upset merchant.

------
tomglynch
In short: Pay extra and we'll include chargeback insurance.

~~~
giarc
I don't get it? You want free insurance?

------
Liron
Any plans to offer this without requiring using Checkout specifically? We use
Stripe Elements because it enables a more native seamless payment collection
UX.

~~~
eeke
(PM on Chargeback Protection here.) We are rolling out with our new Checkout
first because it allows us to tweak the checkout flow and e.g. send a payment
which we’re on the fence about to 3D Secure (3DS) but let obviously good
payments go through without 3DS. We are also exploring ways to expand
Chargeback Protection to other integration options!

~~~
kweks
Hi Eeke. A few years back, we lost a merchant account with stripe due to an
unfortunate combination: no chargeback insurance enabled, high average
transaction value (~600EU) and low monthly volume (we were starting up).

Got one charge back for 800EU that blew us out of the water. Would there be a
mechanism to re-apply, with CB protection enabled ?

We struggled to have this discussion with a Real Person at Stripe to discuss
this .. would you have any leads ?

~~~
edwinwee
Hrm, I'm sorry for that struggle. I'd like to look into this—could you email
me directly at edwin@stripe.com and I can review what happened (and see if we
can help you get set up again)?

------
tacosx
The chargeback is one of the few tools consumers still have with real power.
Sure fraud is still a problem, but it's a really uncomfortable proposition to
start making chargebacks an abstracted cost sink for the corporations.

Of course the fact that this is an upsell line item means only big businesses
will pay for it, the smallest businesses owned by the people just starting out
will be the only ones who actually suffer punitively from chargebacks.

Some things shouldn't be streamlined. Some pain is good. This is a really
unfortunate choice by Stripe.

~~~
Liron
But this product isn't taking away consumer protection via chargebacks, nor
hurting small businesses in any way.

~~~
URSpider94
I think the Parent is upset that businesses will no longer be inconvenienced
and pained by a chargeback.

------
tomglynch
What will Stripe do to prevent this being abused?

~~~
eeke
(I work at Stripe on Radar.) We see Chargeback Protection mostly as a way to
prevent our users from burning too much founder attention doing chargeback
management. Managing abusive use of the credit card rails, both by fraudulent
businesses and by people attempting to defraud legitimate businesses, is
something that we have substantial experience with. We have had years to tune
our machine learning models; this both helps every user of Stripe (through
blocking transactions likely to be fraud-y) and gives us the confidence we
need to roll out a new product like Chargeback Protection widely.

We will, of course, monitor it during the rollout and adjust as we go.

~~~
so_tired
> prevent our users from burning too much founder attention doing chargeback
> management

Yikes. Yes. Thank you. I wish i had this 2 months ago.

------
ssimoni
Will this work with stripe elements not just stripe checkout? I'd like to
upsell my connect accounts this feature.

------
joelrunyon
Is this only if you're using checkout?

