Nuvei Agrees to $4.85 Million FTC Settlement Over Merchant Screening
Payment processor Nuvei will pay $4.85 million and overhaul its merchant screening practices to resolve Federal Trade Commission allegations.
4 reports on this incident · first at Sep 4, 2026, 2:21 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 9, 2026, 10:23 a.m. ET
Nuvei to Pay $4.85 Million to Settle FTC Allegations Over Payment Processing for Fraudulent Merchants
Payment processor Nuvei has agreed to pay $4.85 million to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) allegations that it opened and maintained payment processing accounts for merchants it knew or should have known were engaged in deceptive practices, according to a litigation release from the FTC dated September 4, 2026.
The settlement, which was consented to by the respondents, requires Nuvei Corporation and Nuvei Technologies Inc. to implement robust merchant screening practices. The $4.85 million will be used for consumer redress, the FTC said.
The FTC's allegations have not been proven in court, and the settlement does not constitute an admission of liability.
Sep 9, 2026, 9:53 a.m. ET
Nuvei to Pay $4.85 Million to Settle FTC Allegations Over Payment Processing for Fraudulent Merchants
Payment processor Nuvei has agreed to pay $4.85 million to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) allegations that it opened and maintained payment processing accounts for merchants it knew or should have known were engaged in deceptive practices, according to a litigation release from the FTC dated September 4, 2026.
The settlement, which was consented to by Nuvei Corporation and Nuvei Technologies Inc., requires the $4.85 million payment for consumer redress and mandates that Nuvei implement robust merchant screening practices, as reported by savingadvice.com.
The FTC's allegations and the settlement are part of an administrative proceeding. The FTC's litigation release was published on September 4, 2026.
Sep 4, 2026, 2:21 p.m. ETFirst report
FTC Orders Payment Processor Nuvei to Pay $4.85 Million and Implement Merchant Screening
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has announced a settlement with payment processor Nuvei, requiring the company to implement robust merchant screening practices and pay $4.85 million to resolve charges that it facilitated merchant fraud. The action was announced on September 4, 2026, according to an FTC press release.
The FTC's enforcement action alleges that Nuvei's practices allowed fraudulent merchants to process payments. As part of the settlement, Nuvei must adopt stronger screening measures to prevent such abuse. The FTC's press release, titled "Payment Processor Nuvei Must Implement Robust Merchant Screening Practices and Pay $4.85 Million to Settle FTC Charges that the Firm Facilitated Merchant Fraud," details the terms.
The settlement is part of the FTC's ongoing efforts to hold payment processors accountable for their role in enabling fraud. The specific allegations and required changes are outlined in the FTC's official announcement.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 14:27current
First published.
- Version 14 Sept 2026, 18:21current
First published.
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 13:53current
First published.
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 14:23current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.