The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. Other events that we do not currently anticipate or that we currently deem immaterial also may adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Our operating results have varied on a quarterly basis during our operating history. Our operating results may fluctuate significantly as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are outside our control. Factors that may affect our operating results include the following:

13

We invest heavily in marketing and promotion, customer support, protection programs, technology and further development of the operating infrastructure for our core and non-core operations. Some of this investment entails long-term contractual commitments. As a result, we may be unable to adjust our spending rapidly enough to compensate for any unexpected revenue shortfall, which may harm our profitability.

Growth rates of our Marketplaces businesses in many of our most established markets such as the U.S., Germanyhave been slower than that for ecommerce generally and the U.K., have continued to decline.declined in certain periods. Despite our efforts to stem these declines, growth ratesthis loss of market share in these and other markets, we may continue to decline.not be successful. As our penetrationgrowth rates in established markets grows,slow, we will increasingly need to focus on keeping existing users, especially our top buyers and sellers, active and increasing their activity level on our websites in order to continue to grow our business. In addition, our Marketplaces business is facing increased competitive pressure. In particular, the competitive norm for, and the expected level of service from, Internet ecommerce websites has significantly increased, ranging from improved user experience to greater ease of buying goods to lower (or no) shipping costs to faster shipping times. If

Our Marketplaces and Payments businesses are dependent on consumer purchases. The current economic downturn has resulted in reduced buyer demand and reduced selling prices and may reduce the volume of purchases on our Marketplaces platforms and the volume of transactions paid for using our PayPal payment

service, andall of which would adversely affect our business. In addition, an economic downturn will likely adversely affect our advertising revenues and continue to require us to increase our reserves for bad debt and transaction losses. In the event of the bankruptcy of a merchant that sells goods or services in advance of the date of their delivery or use (such as airline, cruise or concert tickets), PayPal could be liable to the buyers of such goods or services either through its buyer protection program or through chargebacks. Continuing poor economic conditions will likely continue or exacerbate these trends.

Because we conduct a significant and growing portion of our business outside the United States but report our financial results in U.S. dollars, we face exposure to adverse movements in currency exchange rates. In connection with its multi-currency service, PayPal fixes exchange rates twice per day, and may face financial exposure if it incorrectly fixes the exchange rate or if exposure reports are delayed. PayPal also holds some corporate and customer funds innon-U.S. currencies, and thus its financial results are affected by the translation of thesenon-U.S. currencies into U.S. dollars. In addition, the results of operations of many of our internationally focused websites are exposed to foreign exchange rate fluctuations as the financial results of the applicable subsidiaries are translated from the local currency into U.S. dollars upon consolidation. If the U.S. dollar weakens against foreign currencies, the translation of these foreign currency denominated transactions will result in increased net revenues, operating expenses, and net income. Similarly, our net revenues, operating expenses, and net income will be negatively impacted if the U.S. dollar strengthens against foreign currencies, as happened in the second half of 2008. Based on changes in foreign currency rates year over year, netNet revenues in the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 were positively impacted by foreign currency translation of $190.9 million, compared to the prior fiscal year. However, net revenues in the three months ended December 31, 20082009 were negatively impacted by foreign currency translation of $104.9$354.2 million, compared to the same period of the prior fiscal year. Similarly, based on changes in foreign currency rates year over year, operatingOperating income for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 was positively impacted by foreign currency translation of $130.6 million, compared to the prior fiscal year, but operating income for the three months ended December 31, 20082009 was negatively impacted by foreign currency translation of $39.0$179.3 million, compared to the same period of the prior fiscal year. As exchange rates vary, net sales and other operating results, when translated, may differ materially from expectations. In particular, to the extent the U.S. dollar strengthens against the Euro, British pound, Korean won, Australian dollar or Canadian dollar, our foreign revenues and profits will be reduced as a result of these translation adjustments. While from time to time we enter into transactions to hedge portions of our foreign currency translation exposure, it is impossible to perfectly predict or completely eliminate the effects of this exposure. In addition, to the extent the U.S. dollar strengthens against the Euro, the British pound, the Australian dollar, and the Canadian dollar, cross-border trade related to purchases of dollar-denominated goods

In addition, we face exposure to fluctuations in interest rates. For example, recent reductions in interest rates have reduced our investment income, including income we earn on PayPal customer balances, which in turn has materially lowered our net interest income.

We have received in the past, and we anticipate receiving in the future, communications alleging that certain items listed or sold through our service by our users infringe third-party copyrights, trademarks and trade names, or other intellectual property rights. See “Item 3 — Legal Proceedings” below. Although we have sought to work actively with the owners of intellectual property rights to eliminate listings offering infringing items on our websites, some rights owners have expressed the view that our efforts are insufficient. Content owners and other intellectual property rights owners have been active in asserting their purported rights against online companies, including eBay. Allegations of infringement of intellectual property rights have resulted in threats of litigation and actual litigation against us from time to time by rights owners, including litigation brought by luxury brand owners such as Tiffany & Co. in the U.S. (where Tiffany & Co. is currently appealing the trial court ruling in favor of eBay), Rolex S.A. and Coty Prestige Lancaster Group GmbH in Germany, Louis Vuitton Malletier and Christian Dior Couture in France, L’Oréal SA, Lancôme Parfums et Beauté & Cie, and Laboratoire Garnier & Cie in several European countries. The plaintiffs in these cases seek to hold eBay liable for alleged counterfeit items listed on our sites by third parties, for “tester” and other not for resale consumer products and for unboxed and other allegedly nonconforming products listed on our sites by third parties, for the alleged misuse of trademarks or copyrights in listings or otherwise on our sites, or in connection with paid search advertisements, or for alleged violations of selective distribution channel laws or parallel import laws for listings of authentic items.items, or for alleged non-compliance with consumer protection laws. Such plaintiffs seek, among other things, injunctive relief and damages. In the aggregate, these suits could result in significant damage awards and could adversely affect our business. In June 2008, the Paris Court of Commerce ruled in theLouis Vuitton MalletierandChristian Dior Couturecases that eBay and eBay International AG were liable for failing to prevent the sale of counterfeit items on its websites that traded on plaintiffs’ brand names and for interfering with the plaintiffs’ selective distribution network. The court awarded the plaintiffs approximately EUR 38.6 million in damages and issued an injunction (enforceable by daily fines of up to EUR 100,000) prohibiting all sales of perfumes and cosmetics bearing the Dior, Guerlain, Givenchy and Kenzo brands over all worldwide eBay sites to the extent they are accessible from France. We have taken measures to comply with the injunction and have appealed these rulings. However, theseA subsequent ruling fined us EUR 1.7 million (the equivalent of EUR 2,500 per day) and indicated we should employ additional measures to enforce the injunction. These and similar suits may force us to modify our business practices, which could lower our revenue, increase our costs or make our websites less convenient to our customers. Any such results could materially harm our business.

In addition to litigation from rights owners, we may be subject to regulatory, civil or criminal proceedings and penalties if thegovernmental authorities feelbelieve we have aided in the sale of counterfeit goods. While we have had some early success in defending against such litigation, more recent cases have been based, at least in part, on different legal theories than those of earlier cases, and there is no guarantee that we will continue to be successful in defending against such litigation. For example, the German Federal Supreme Court has ruled that we may owe duties, under certain circumstances, to content owners and competitors relating to taking reasonable

steps to prevent the listing of illegal, counterfeit, and pirated items. Plaintiffs in recent cases have argued that we are not entitled to safe harbors under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in the U.S. or as a hosting provider in the European Union under the Electronic Commerce Directive because of the alleged active nature of our involvement with our sellers, and that, whether or not such safe harbors are available, we should be found liable because we supposedly have not adequately removed listings that are counterfeit listingsor are authentic but allegedly violate trademark law or effectively suspended users who have created such listings. We are constantly improvingseeking to improve and modifyingmodify our efforts to eliminate counterfeit and pirated items. These improvements are in response to ongoing business initiatives designed to reduce bad buyer experiences and improve customer satisfaction as well as in response to new patterns we are seeing among counterfeiters and others committing fraud on our users. Notwithstanding these efforts, we believe that the legal climate, especially in Europe, is becoming more adverse to our arguments,positions, which may require us to take actions which could lower our revenues, increase our costs, or make our websites less convenient to our customers, which may materially harm our business. In addition, a public perception that counterfeit or pirated items are commonplace on our site,sites, even if factually incorrect, could damage our reputation and our business.

We have repeatedly been sued for allegedly infringing other parties’ patents. Some of these ongoing suits are described under the heading “Item 3 — Legal Proceedings,”Proceedings” below. We are a defendant in other patent suits and we have been notified of several other potential patent disputes, and expect that we will increasingly be subject to patent infringement claims involving various aspects of our Marketplaces and Payments and Communications businessessegments as our services expand in scope and complexity. These claims, whether meritorious or not, are time consuming and costly to resolve, and could require expensive changes in our methods of doing business, could require us to enter into costly royalty or licensing agreements, or could require us to cease conducting certain operations.

The law relating to the liability of providers of online services for the activities of their users on their service is often challenged in the U.S. and internationally. In violation of our policies, unlawful goods and stolen goods have been listed and traded on our services. We may be unable to prevent our users from selling unlawful or stolen goods or unlawful services, or selling goods or services in an unlawful manner, and we may be subject to allegations of civil or criminal liability for unlawful activities carried out by users through our services. We have been subject to several lawsuits based upon such allegations. In December 2004, an executive of Baazee.com, our Indian subsidiary, was arrested in connection with a user’s listing of a pornographic video clip on that website. We continue to contest the charges related to this arrest. Similarly, one of our Korean subsidiarysubsidiaries (IAC), and one of its employees were found criminally liable for listings (which occurred prior to our acquisition) on the Korean subsidiary’sIAC’s website. The German Federal Supreme Court has ruled that we may have a duty to take reasonable measures to prevent prohibited DVDs from being sold on our site to minors and that competitors may be able to enforce this duty. In a number of circumstances, third parties, including government regulators and law enforcement officials, have alleged that our services aid and abet certain violations of certain laws, including antiscalping laws with respect to the resale of tickets, laws regarding the sale of counterfeit items, the fencing of stolen goods, and restrictiveselective distribution channel laws, distance selling laws and distance selling laws.

PayPal’s payment system is also susceptible to potentially illegal or improper uses. These may include illegal online gambling, fraudulent sales of goods or services, illicit sales of prescription medications or controlled substances, piracy of software and other intellectual property, money laundering, terrorist financing, bank fraud, child pornography trafficking, prohibited sales of alcoholic beverages or tobacco products, and online securities fraud. Recent changes in law have increased the penalties for intermediaries providing payment services for certain illegal activities. Despite measures PayPal has taken to detect and lessen the risk of this kind of conduct, including PayPal’s ability to take legal action to recover its losses for certain violations of its acceptable use policy, illegal activities could still be funded using PayPal. Any resulting claims or liabilities could adversely affectharm our business.

Furthermore, several court decisions arguably have narrowed the scope of the immunity provided to Internet service providers like us under the Communications Decency Act. For example, the Ninth Circuit recentlyhas held that certain immunity provisions under the Communications Decency Act might not apply to the extent that a website owner materially contributes to the development of unlawful content on its website. As our websites evolve, challenges to the applicability of these immunities can be expected to continue. In addition, the Paris Court of Commerce has ruled in theLouis Vuitton MalletierandChristian Dior Couturecases that applicable laws protecting passive internet “hosts” from liability are inapplicable to eBay given that the content in question was provided by users under eBay’s control and authority. This trend, if continued, may increase our potential liability to third parties for the user-provided content on our sites, particularly in jurisdictions outside the U.S. where laws governing Internet transactions are unsettled. If we become liable for information provided by our users and carried on our service in any jurisdiction in which we operate, we could be directly harmed and we may be forced to implement new measures to reduce our exposure to this liability, including expending substantial resources or discontinuing certain service offerings, which would negatively affect our financial results. In addition, the increased attention focused upon liability issues as a result of these lawsuits and legislative proposals could require us to incur additional costs and harm our reputation and our business.

A large number of transactions occur on our websites on a daily basis. Government regulators have received a significant number of consumer complaints about both eBay and PayPal, which, while small as a percentage of our total transactions, are large in aggregate numbers. As a result, from time to time we have been contacted by

various foreign and domestic governmental regulatory agencies that have questions about our operations and the steps we take to protect our users from fraud. PayPal has received inquiries regarding its restriction and disclosure practices from the Federal Trade Commission and regarding these and other business practices from the attorneys general of a number of states. In September 2006, PayPal entered into a settlement agreement with the attorneys general of a number of states under which it agreed to pay $1.7 million to the attorneys general, shorten and streamline its user agreement, increase educational messaging to users about funding choices, and communicate more information regarding protection programs to users. We currently face inquiries from government regulators in various jurisdictions related to actions that we have taken that are designed to improve the safety of transactions on our websites, most notably by requiring PayPal to be offeredand/or used for certain high-risk transactions or by certain sellers in certain jurisdictions, and we may face similar inquires from other government regulators in the future. For example, the Reserve Bank of Australia is currently reviewingrecently reviewed our policypolicies requiring sellers to offer PayPal as a payment alternative on most transactions on our localized Australian website and precluding sellers from imposing a surcharge or any other fee for accepting PayPal as aor other payment method.methods. Similarly, Bill Me Later has from time to time received customer complaints that could result in investigations into Bill Me Later’s business practices by state or federal regulators. As a result of the current credit crisis, we expect new laws and regulations to be imposedadopted that impose, among other things, additional obligations and restrictions on providers of credit. We are likely to receive additional inquiries from regulatory agencies in the future, including under existing or new credit laws or regulations, which may lead to action against us. We have responded to all inquiries from regulatory agencies by describing our current and planned antifraud efforts, customer support procedures, operating procedures and disclosures. If one or more of these agencies is not satisfied with our response to current or future inquiries, we could be subject to enforcement actions, fines or other penalties, or forced to change our operating practices in ways that could harm our business.

From time to time, we are involved in other disputes or regulatory inquiries that arise in the ordinary course of business. The number and significance of these disputes and inquiries have increased as our business expandshas expanded and

In addition, in 2009 we changed the dispute resolution process for transactions on eBay.com and eBay.co.uk, which are described in greater detail above under the caption “Changes to our dispute resolution program could increase our costs and loss rate” and which could result in an increase in our combined eBay and PayPal transaction losses.

PayPal’s highly automated and liquid payment service makes PayPal an attractive target for fraud. In configuring its service, PayPal continually strives to maintain the right balance of appropriate measures to promote both convenience and security for customers. Identity thieves and those committing fraud using stolen credit card or bank account numbers can potentially steal large amounts of money from businesses such as PayPal. We believe that several of PayPal’s current and former competitors in the electronic payments business have gone out of business or significantly restricted their businesses largely due to losses from this type of fraud. While PayPal uses advanced anti-fraud technologies, we expect that technically knowledgeable criminals will continue to attempt to circumvent PayPal’s anti-fraud systems using increasingly sophisticated methods. In addition, PayPal’s service could be subject to employee fraud or other internal security breaches, and PayPal may be required to reimburse customers for any funds stolen as a result of such breaches. Merchants could also request reimbursement, or stop using PayPal, if they are affected by buyer fraud or other types of fraud.

PayPal incurs substantial losses from merchant fraud, including claims from customers that merchants have not performed or that their goods or services do not match the merchant’s description. PayPal also incurs losses from claims that the customer did not authorize the purchase, from buyer fraud, from erroneous transmissions, and from customers who have closed bank accounts or have insufficient funds in them to satisfy payments. In addition to the direct costs of such losses, if they are related to credit card transactions and become excessive, they could potentially result in PayPal losing the right to accept credit cards for payment. If PayPal were unable to accept credit cards, the velocity of trade on eBay could decrease and result in corresponding decreases in our net Total Payment Volume,total payment volume, in which case our business would further suffer. Bill Me Later is similarly subject to the risk of fraudulent activity associated with merchants, users of the Bill Me Later service and third parties handling its user information, which could increase our exposure to transaction losses and reduce the profitability of Bill Me Later’s business. Our Payments business has taken measures to detect and reduce the risk of fraud, but these measures need to be continually improved and may not be effective against new and continually evolving forms of fraud or in connection with new product offerings. If these measures do not succeed, our business will suffer.

eBay faces similar risks with respect to fraudulent activities on its websites. eBay periodically receives complaints from users who may not have received the goods that they had purchased. In some cases individuals have been arrested and convicted for fraudulent activities using our websites. eBay also receives complaints from sellers who have not received payment for the goods that a buyer had contracted to purchase. Non-payment may occur

Negative publicity and user sentiment generated as a result of fraudulent or deceptive conduct by users of our Marketplaces and Payments services could damage our reputation, reduce our ability to attract new users or retain our current users, and diminish the value of our brand names. We believe that negative user experiences are one of the primary reasons users stop using our services.

Cross-border trade has become an increasingly important source of both revenue and profits for us. Cross-border transactions using our websites generally provide higher revenues and gross margins than similar transactions that take place within a single country due toor market. We generally earn higher transaction fees we earn for those transactions. Cross-bordercross-border transactions involving PayPal, and our Marketplaces business continues to represent a relatively easy way for buyers and sellers to engage in cross-border trade has become an increasingly important source of both revenue and profits for us.compared with other alternatives. To the extent that any factors result in a net reduction in cross-border trade, including, among other factors, fluctuations in exchange rates, the application of specific national or regional laws (e.g., selective distribution channel laws and parallel import laws) to users in other countries, or any other factors impose restrictions on, or increase the costs of, shipping goods across national borders (including customs enforcement and tariffs), our business would suffer. We believe that recent increases in the relative value of the U.S. dollar versus other currencies have reduced cross-border trade between U.S. sellers and foreign buyers, without a corresponding increase in cross-border traffic in the other direction, adversely affecting our business.

To succeed, online commerce and communications must provide a secure transmission of confidential information over public networks. Our security measures may not detect or prevent security breaches that could harm our business. Currently, a significant number of our users authorize us to bill their credit card accounts directly for all transaction fees charged by us. PayPal’s users routinely provide credit card and other financial information. We rely on encryption and authentication technology licensed from third parties to provide the security and authentication to effectively secure transmission of confidential information, including customer credit card

numbers. Advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptography or other developments may result in a compromise or breach of the technology used by us to protect transaction data.data being breached or compromised. Other large Internet companies have recently disclosed sophisticated and highly targeted attacks on portions of their sites. In addition, any party who is able to illicitly obtain a user’s password could access the user’s transaction data. An increasing number of websites have reported breaches of their security. Any compromise of our security could harm our reputation and, therefore, our business, and could result in a violation of applicable privacy and other laws. In addition, a party that is able to circumvent our security measures could misappropriate proprietary information, cause interruption in our operations, damage our computers or those of our users, or otherwise damage our reputation and business. Under credit card rules and our contracts with our card processors, if there is a breach of credit card information that we store, or that is stored by PayPal’s direct credit card processing customers, we could be liable to the credit card issuing banks for their cost of issuing new cards and related expenses. In addition, if we fail to follow credit card industry security standards, even if there is no compromise of customer information, we could incur significant

Our servers are also vulnerable to computer viruses, physical or electronic break-ins, and similar disruptions, and we have experienced “denial-of-service” type attacks on our system that have made all or portions of our websites unavailable for periods of time.time (most recently involving our Korean IAC website in July 2009). We may need to expend significant resources to protect against security breaches or to address problems caused by breaches. These issues are likely to become more difficult as we expand the number of places where we operate. Security breaches, including any breach by us or by parties with which we have commercial relationships that result in the unauthorized release of our users’ personal information, could damage our reputation and expose us to a risk of loss or litigation and possible liability. Our insurance policies carry low coverage limits, which may not be adequate to reimburse us for losses caused by security breaches.

Our users, as well as those of other prominent Internet companies, have been and will continue to be targeted by parties using fraudulent “spoof” and “phishing” emails to misappropriate passwords, credit card numbers, or other personal information or to introduce viruses through “trojan horse” programs to our users’ computers. These emails appear to be legitimate emails sent by eBay, PayPal, Skype, or a user of one of those businesses, but direct recipients to fake websites operated by the sender of the email or request that the recipient send a password or other confidential information via email or download a program. Despite our efforts to mitigate “spoof” and “phishing” emails through product improvements and user education, “spoof” and “phishing” remain a serious problem that may damage our brands, discourage use of our websites, and increase our costs.

We are subject to laws relating to the collection, use, retention, security and transfer of personally identifiable information about our users, especially for financial information and for users located outside of the U.S. In addition, as an entity licensed and subject to regulation as a bank in Luxembourg, PayPal (Europe) S.A.R.L. et Cie, SCA is subject to banking secrecy laws. In many cases, these laws apply not only to third-party transactions but also to transfers of information between ourselves and our subsidiaries, and between ourselves, our subsidiaries, and other parties with which we have commercial relations. New laws in this area have been passed by several jurisdictions, and other jurisdictions are considering imposing additional restrictions. The interpretation and application of user data protection laws are in a state of flux. These laws may be interpreted and applied inconsistently from country to country and our current data protection policies and practices may not be consistent with those interpretations and applications. Complying with these varying international requirements could cause us to incur substantial costs or require us to change our business practices in a manner adverse to our business. In addition, we have and post on our websites our own privacy policies and practices concerning the collection, use and disclosure of user data. Any failure, or perceived failure, by us to comply with

our posted privacy policies or with any regulatory requirements or orders or other federal, state or international privacy or consumer protection-related laws and regulations could result in proceedings or actions against us by governmental entities or others, subject us to significant penalties and negative publicity and adversely affect us. In addition, as noted above, we are subject to the possibility of security breaches, which themselves may result in a violation of these laws.

We derive an increasing portion of our revenuessignificant revenue from advertising on our websites. Revenues from online advertising are sensitive to events and trends that affect advertising expenditures, such as general changes in the

We believe that continuing to strengthen our brands will be critical to achieving widespread acceptance of our services, and will require a continued focus on active marketing efforts across all of our brands. The demand for and cost of online and traditional advertising have been increasing, and may continue to increase. Accordingly, weWe will need to continue to spend substantial amounts of money on, and devote substantial resources to, advertising, marketing, and other efforts to create and maintain brand loyalty among users. Since 2004,2005, we have significantly increased the number of brands we are supporting, adding Rent.com, Shopping.com, our classified websites (e.g., Kijiji, Marktplaats and Marktplaats)Den Blå Avis), StubHub, Skype and Bill Me Later and Gmarket, among others. Each of these brands requires its own resources, increasing the costs of our branding efforts. Brand promotion activities may not yield increased revenues, and even if they do, any increased revenues may not offset the expenses incurred in building our brands. Also, major search engine operators that we use to advertise our brands have frequently-changing rules that govern their pricing, availability and placement of online advertisement (e.g., paid search, keywords), and changes to these rules could negatively affect our use of online advertising to promote our brands. If we fail to promote and maintain our brands, or if we incur substantial expenses in an unsuccessful attempt to promote and maintain our brands, our business would be harmed.

We are subject to the same foreign and domestic laws as other companies conducting business on and off the Internet. It is not always clear how existing laws governing issues such as property ownership, copyrights, trademarks and other intellectual property issues, parallel imports and distribution controls, taxation, libel and defamation, obscenity, and personal privacy apply to online businesses such as ours. The majority of these laws were adopted prior to the advent of the Internet and related technologies and, as a result, do not contemplate or address the unique issues of the Internet and related technologies. Those laws that do reference the Internet, such as the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the European Union’s DirectiveDirectives on Distance Selling and Electronic Commerce, are being interpreted by the courts, but their applicability and scope remain uncertain. Furthermore, as our activities and the types of goods and services listed on our websites expand, including

through acquisitions such as our acquisition of Bill Me Later, a transactional credit provider, in November 2008 and StubHub, an online ticket marketplace, in February 2007, regulatory agencies or courts may claim or hold that we or our users are subject to licensure or prohibited from conducting our business in their jurisdiction, either generally or with respect to certain actions (e.g., the sale of real estate, event tickets, cultural goods, boats and automobiles).

Over the last few years some large retailers and their trade associations have sought legislation in a number of states and the U.S. Congress that would make eBay liable for the sale of stolen property or would ban certain categories of goods from sale on our platform, including gift cards and health and beauty products. No such legislation has passed. Nonetheless, the proponents continue to seek passage of such legislation, and if any of these laws are adopted itthey could harm our business.

Numerous states and foreign jurisdictions, including the State of California, where our headquarters are located, have regulations regarding “auctions” and the handling of property by “secondhand dealers” or “pawnbrokers.” Several states and some foreign jurisdictions, including France, have attempted, and may attempt in the future, to impose such regulations upon us or our users. Attempted enforcement of these laws against some of our users appears to be increasing and such attempted enforcements could harm our business. In France, we have been sued by Conseil des Ventes, the French auction regulatory authority. The agencyauthority alleges that sales on our French website constitute illegal auctions that cannot be performed without its consent. Although we have won this lawsuit, this decision is being appealed. A lawsuit alleging similar claims has been brought against us by two associations of French antique dealers. We intend to vigorously defend against these lawsuits. However, this and other regulatory and licensure claims could result in costly litigation and, if successful, could require us to change the way we or our users do business in ways that increase costs or reduce revenues (for example, by forcing us to prohibit listings of certain items for some locations). We could also be subject to fines or other penalties, and any of these outcomes could harm our business.

A number of the lawsuits against us relating to trademark issues seek to have our websites subject to unfavorable local laws. For example, “trademark exhaustion” principles provide trademark owners with certain rights to control the sale of a branded authentic product until it has been placed on the market by the trademark holder or with the holder’s consent. The application of “trademark exhaustion” principles is largely unsettled in the context of the Internet, and if trademark owners are able to force us to prohibit listings of certain items in one or more locations, our business could be harmed.

As we expand and localize our international activities, we become obligated to comply with the laws of the countries or markets in which we operate. In addition, because our services are accessible worldwide, and we facilitate sales of goods to users worldwide, one or more jurisdictions may claim that we or our users are required to comply with their laws based on the location of our servers or one or more of our users, or the location of the product or service being sold or provided in an ecommerce transaction. For example, we were found liable in

France, under French law in the recentLouis Vuitton Malletierlitigation for transactions on our websites worldwide that did not involve French buyers and sellers.or sellers (see “Item 3 — Legal Proceedings” below). Laws regulating Internet and ecommerce companies outside of the U.S. may be less favorable than those in the U.S., giving greater rights to consumers, content owners, competitors, users and other third parties. Compliance may be more costly or may require us to change our business practices or restrict our service offerings, and the imposition of any regulations on our users may harm our business. In addition, we may be subject to overlapping legal or regulatory regimes that impose conflicting requirements on us. Our alleged failure to comply with foreign laws could subject us to penalties ranging from criminal prosecution to significant fines to bans on our services, in addition to the significant costs we may incur in defending against such actions.

In light of the global financial crisis, federal lawmakers in Washington, D.C., have discussed the possibility of overhauling the U.S. financial regulatory system and making significant changes to regulations governing financial services.

Our Payments business is subject to regulation as a bank in certain jurisdictions. Of the 190 markets whose residents can use the PayPal service, 31 (27 countries plus four French overseas departments) are members of the European Union (EU). Since 2007, PayPal has provided localized versions of its service to customers in the EU through PayPal (Europe) S.A.R.L. et Cie, SCA.,SCA, a wholly-owned subsidiary of PayPal that is licensed and subject to regulation as a bank in Luxembourg. Accordingly, PayPal (Europe) is subject to significant fines or other enforcement action if it violates the disclosure, reporting, anti-money laundering, capitalization, funds management, corporate governance or other requirements imposed on Luxembourg banks. PayPal has limited experience in operating as a bank, and any fines or other enforcement actions imposed by the Luxembourg regulator could adversely affect PayPal’s business. PayPal (Europe) implements its localized services in EU countries through an expedited “passport” notification process through the Luxembourg regulator to regulators in other EU member states pursuant to EU Directives, and has completed the “passport” notice process in all EU member countries. The regulators in these countries could notify PayPal (Europe) of local consumer protection laws that will apply to its business, in addition to Luxembourg consumer protection law, and could also seek to persuade the Luxembourg regulator to order PayPal (Europe) to conduct its activities in the local country through a branch office. Any such responses from these regulators could increase the cost of, or delay, PayPal’s plans for expanding its business.

PayPal is also subject to various anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing laws and regulations around the world that prohibit, among other things, its involvement in transferring the proceeds of criminal activities. Although PayPal has implemented a program to comply with these laws and regulations, any errors or failure to comply with federal, state or foreign money laundering and counter-terrorist financing laws could result in significant criminal and civil lawsuits, penalties, and forfeiture of significant assets. Several countries, including Australia, Luxembourg and Singapore, have recently implemented new anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing laws and regulations, and PayPal has had to make changes to its procedures in response. In November 2009, the Australian anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing regulator (AUSTRAC) accepted an enforceable undertaking from PayPal Australia pursuant to which PayPal Australia agreed, among other things, to appoint an independent auditor to assess PayPal Australia’s anti-money laundering compliance policies and procedures and issue a report.

In the United States, PayPal is also subject to regulations that require it to report suspicious activities involving transactions of $2,000, or more and may be required to obtain and keep more detailed records on the senders and recipients in certain transfers of $3,000 or more. The interpretation of suspicious activities in this context is uncertain. Future regulations under the USA PATRIOT Act may require PayPal to revise the procedures it uses to verify the identity of its customers and to monitor international transactions more closely. PayPal has localized its service in a number of other countries and as a result is subject to additional verification and reporting requirements, which in some cases are more stringent. As PayPal continues to localize its services in additional jurisdictions, PayPal could be required, among other things, to learn more about its customers before opening an account, to obtain additional verification of customers and to monitor its customers’ activities more closely. These requirements could impose significant costs on PayPal, make it more difficult for new customers to join its network and reduce the attractiveness of its product.

To date, PayPal has obtained licenses to operate as a money transmitter in 42 U.S. states and territories and interpretations in seven states that licensing is not required under their existing statutes. The remaining U.S. state

and territories do not currently regulate money transmitters. As a licensed money transmitter, PayPal is subject to restrictions on its investment of customer funds, reporting requirements, bonding requirements, and inspection by state regulatory agencies. If PayPal were found to be in violation of money services laws or regulations, PayPal could be subject to liability, forced to cease doing business with residents of certain states, forced to change its business practices, or required to obtain additional licenses or regulatory approvals that could impose a substantial cost on PayPal. Any change to PayPal’s business practices that makes the service less attractive to customers or prohibits its use by residents of a particular jurisdiction could decrease the velocity of trade on eBay, which would further harm our business.

Although there have been no definitive interpretations to date, PayPal has assumed that its service is subject to the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E of the U.S. Federal Reserve Board. As a result, among other things, PayPal must provide advance disclosure of changes to its service, follow specified error resolution procedures and reimburse consumers for losses above $50 from transactions not authorized by the consumer. PayPal currently voluntarily reimburses consumers for all financial losses from transactions not authorized by the consumer, not just losses above $50. PayPal seeks to pass most of these losses on to the relevant merchants, but PayPal incurs losses if the merchant does not have sufficient funds in its PayPal account.

Our Bill Me Later service is similarly subject to a variety of laws and regulations. Although Bill Me Later does not originate loans, one or more jurisdictions may conclude that Bill Me Later is a lender or money transmitter or loan broker, which could subject us to liability or regulation in one or more jurisdictions. Additionally, federal regulators could mandate changes to the relationship between Bill Me Later and CIT Bank, the financial institution that Bill Me Later relies on to extend credit to customers with the Bill Me Later service. Any termination or interruption of CIT Bank’s lending services to consumers could result in an interruption of Bill Me Later services, as described under the caption “Bill Me Later’s operations depend on lending services provided by CIT Bank” above. Also, effective February 2010, certain provisions of the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009, or the CARD Act, will require CIT Bank to make fundamental changes to many of the practices currently used with respect to Bill Me Later consumer accounts, including marketing, pricing (including finance charges and fees assessed on receivables purchased by CIT Bank) and billing, which could in turn have an adverse changes in this relationship could negatively impactaffect on Bill Me Later’s ability to continue operating its business as currently conducted.

PayPal does not belong to or directly access credit card networks, such as Visa and MasterCard. As a result, PayPal must rely on banks or other payment processors to process transactions, and must pay a feefees for this service. From time to time, credit card networks have increased, and may increase in the future, the interchange fees and assessments that they charge for each transaction using one of their cards. PayPal’s credit card processors have the right to pass any increases in interchange fees and assessments on to PayPal as well as increase their own fees for processing. These increasedhigher fees increase PayPal’s operating costs and reduce its profit margins. PayPal is also required by its processors to comply with credit card network operating rules, and PayPal has agreed to reimburse its processors for any fines they are assessed by credit card networks as a result of any rule violations by PayPal or PayPal’s customers. The credit card networks set and interpret the credit card rules. Credit card networks could adopt new operating rules or re-interpret existing rules that PayPal or its processors might find difficult or even impossible to follow. As a result, PayPal could lose its ability to give customers the option of using credit cards to fund their payments. If PayPal were unable to accept credit cards, its business would be seriously damaged. In addition, the velocity of trade on eBay could decrease and our business would further suffer.

PayPal is required to comply with credit card networks’ special operating rules for Internet payment services. PayPal and its credit card processors have implemented specific business processes for merchant customers in order to comply with these rules, but any failure to comply could result in fines, the amount of which would be within the credit card networks’ discretion. PayPal also could be subject to fines from credit card networks if it fails to detect that merchants are engaging in activities that are illegal or that are considered “high

risk,” primarily the sale of certain types of digital content. For “high risk” merchants, PayPal must either prevent such merchants from using PayPal or register such merchants with credit card networks and conduct additional monitoring with respect to such merchants. PayPal has incurred fines from its credit card processorprocessors relating to PayPal’s failure to detect the use of its service by “high risk” merchants. The amount of these fines has not been material, but any additional fines in the future would likely be for larger amounts, could become material, and could result in a termination of PayPal’s ability to accept credit cards or changes in PayPal’s process for registering new customers, which would seriously damage PayPal’s business.

PayPal pays significant transaction fees when senderscustomers fund payment transactions using credit cards, lower payments when customers fund payments with debit cards, nominal fees when customers fund payment transactions by electronic transfer of funds from bank accounts, and no fees when customers fund payment transactions from an existing PayPal account balance or use buyer credit issued by GE Money Bank. SendersAs of October 2009, eligible U.S. customers may also fund payment transactions through a loan originated by CIT Bank in the Bill Me Later service, and PayPal will incur no fees for such transactions. Customers fund a significant portion of PayPal’s payment volume using credit cards, and PayPal’s financial success will remain highly sensitive to changes in the rate at which its senders fund payments using credit cards. Senders may prefer funding using credit cards rather than bank account transfers for a number of reasons,

PayPal’s ability to manage and account accurately for customer funds requires a high level of internal controls. In some of the markets that PayPal serves and currencies that PayPal offers, PayPal has a limited operating history and limited management experience in managing these internal controls. As PayPal’s business continues to grow, it must strengthen its internal controls accordingly. PayPal’s success requires significant public confidence in its ability to handle large and growing transaction volumes and amounts of customer funds. Any failure to maintain necessary controls or to manage accurately customer funds accurately could severely diminish customer use of PayPal’s product severely.

We have experienced system failures from time to time, and any interruption in the availability of our websites will reduce our current revenues and profits, could harm our future revenues and profits, and could subject us to regulatory scrutiny. Our eBay.com website has been interrupted for periods of up to 22 hours, and ourhours. In November 2009, technical systems issues resulted in eBay.com users being unable to search for listed items for a period of several hours. Our PayPal website has suffered intermittent unavailability for periods as long as five days. In August 2007, Skype experienced an interruption during which the majority of Skype’s users were unable to use its productsdays, most recently for approximately two days.five hours in August 2009. Any unscheduled interruption in our services results in an immediate, and possibly substantial, loss of revenues. Frequent or persistent interruptions in our services could cause current or potential users to believe that our systems are unreliable, leading them to switch to our competitors or to avoid our sites, and could permanently harm our reputation and brands. Reliability is particularly critical for PayPal, especially as it seeks to expand its Merchant Services business. Because PayPal is a regulated financial entity, frequent or persistent site interruptions could lead to fines, penalties, or mandatory changes to PayPal’s business practices, and ultimately could cause PayPal to lose existing licenses it needs to operate or prevent it from obtaining additional licenses that it needs to expand. Finally, because our customers may use our products for critical transactions, any system failures could result in damage to our customers’ businesses. These customers could seek significant compensation from us for their losses. Even if unsuccessful, this type of claim likely would be time consumingtime-consuming and costly for us to address.

Although our systems have been designed around industry-standard architectures to reduce downtime in the event of outages or catastrophic occurrences, they remain vulnerable to damage or interruption from earthquakes, floods, fires, power loss, telecommunication failures, terrorist attacks, computer viruses, computer denial-of-service attacks, and similar events.events or disruptions. Some of our systems, including our Shopping.com and Skype websiteswebsite and the systems related to the Bill Me Later business, are not fully redundant, and our disaster recovery planning is not sufficient for all eventualities. Our systems are also subject to break-ins, sabotage, and intentional acts of vandalism. Despite any precautions we may take, the occurrence of a natural disaster, a decision by any of our third-party hosting providers to close a facility we use without adequate notice for financial or other reasons, or other unanticipated problems at our hosting facilities could cause system interruptions, delays, and loss of critical data, and result in lengthy interruptions in our services. We do not carry business interruption insurance sufficient to compensate us for losses that may result from interruptions in our service as a result of system failures.

Our international expansion has been rapid and our international business, especially in Germany and the U.K., has also become critical to our revenues and profits. Net revenues outside the U.S. accounted for approximately 51% and 54%, respectively, of our net revenues in both fiscal years 2007year 2008 and 2008.2009. Expansion into international markets requires management attention and resources and requires us to localize our services to conform to local cultures, standards, and policies. The commercial, Internet, and transportation infrastructure in lesser-developed countries may make it more difficult for us to replicate our traditional Marketplace business model. In many countries, we compete with local companies that understand the local market better than we do, and we may not benefit from first-to-market advantages. We may not be successful in expanding into particular international markets or in generating revenues from foreign operations. For example, in 2002 we withdrew our eBay marketplace offering from the Japanese market, and in 2007 we contributed our business in China to a joint venture with a local Chinese company. Even if we are successful in developing new markets, we often expect the costs of operating new sites to exceed our net revenues for at least 12 months in most countries.

As we continue to expand internationally, including through the expansion of PayPal, Skype, Shopping.com, and our classified businesses, we are increasingly subject to risks of doing business internationally, including the following:

27