COF to Face Lawsuit Over Alleged Theft of Influencer Commissions

Capital One COF will have to face a lawsuit by social media creators who claim that the bank’s free browser extension deprived them of commissions on sales generated through their content.

Details of the Lawsuit Against Capital One

In a ruling issued Monday night, Anthony Trenga, U.S. District Judge in Alexandria, VA, stated that influencers presented a plausible case, alleging Capital One knew or should have been aware that the extension redirected their commissions by overriding tracking codes, such as cookies, which verify consumers had seen their content.

The lawsuit concerns affiliate marketing, a system in which creators promote content on their platforms and social media channels in exchange for commission-based earnings from online retailers and third-party marketers.

According to the creators, the Capital One Shopping browser extension, which has more than 10 million users, is used to discover discounts. It erroneously reflected Capital One as the source of referral traffic at checkout, making it appear as if consumers had clicked the bank’s referral links before making purchases.

The creators alleged that this enabled Capital One to collect millions of dollars in commissions that rightfully belonged to bloggers, influencers, YouTubers and other content creators.

Judge Trenga ruled that the creators can proceed with their claims that Capital One was unjustly enriched, interfered with their contracts and earning potential, and violated the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. However, he dismissed a conversion claim along with four other state-level claims.

Capital One’s Response to Allegations

Capital One stated in a response, "Capital One Shopping does not replace affiliate marketer cookies or unlawfully take credit for commissions. We disagree with the allegations in the complaint and look forward to defending ourselves in court."
 
The bank requested dismissal, arguing that merchants determine how to distribute commissions.
The bank also suggested the lawsuit reflected creators' frustration that merchants "do not always share their view that they did all the work."

Capital One has been dealing with regulatory issues recently. In May 2025, it agreed to pay $425 million to settle nationwide litigation that accused it of deceiving its online savings account customers to avoid paying millions of dollars in interest payments.

In March 2024, Reuters reported that a lawsuit filed against COF claiming that the company overcharged its credit and debit card customers on foreign currency-related transactions had been dismissed.

Capital One’s Price Performance & Zacks Rank

In the past six months, COF shares have risen 5.4% compared with the industry’s growth of 3.7%.

Currently, Capital One carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

Regulatory Probes Faced by Other Financial Services Firms

Last month, UBS Group AG UBS agreed to pay $511 million to resolve a tax probe by the U.S. Department of Justice against Credit Suisse for preparing false income tax returns and tax evasion. UBS Group AG acquired Credit Suisse in 2023.

UBS Group has agreed to the probe settlement as part of its inherited legal liabilities from Credit Suisse. The company will record the charge in its second-quarter 2025 results, while aiming to reduce the future legal cost reserves related to Credit Suisse.

Similarly, in April, a federal judge ordered Bank of America BAC to pay $540.3 million in a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) lawsuit accusing the bank of paying less than what it owed for deposit insurance.

The FDIC sued Bank of America for $1.12 billion in 2017, accusing it of lowering its deposit insurance contributions by failing to honor a rule implemented in 2011 that changed how banks report risk exposure to counterparties.

Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report

This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com).

Zacks Investment Research