Phia Affiliate Attribution Allegations Deepen After New Bloomberg Report 

New reporting has raised further questions about when Phia’s leadership became aware of affiliate attribution features that could claim credit for sales the shopping platform had not generated.

Bloomberg reported on 11 August that internal Slack messages, company data and historical source code indicate that co-founders Phoebe Gates and Sophia Kianni knew about and encouraged features capable of setting Phia’s affiliate tracking without deliberate shopper interaction. According to the report, the disputed functionality was in operation from at least December 2025 and could be remotely switched on or off.

The findings challenge Phia’s earlier explanation that code included in a recent release had caused misattributions for a subset of users and that the company acted after being notified of the problem.

Phia disputes parts of Bloomberg’s latest account. In a statement reported by TechCrunch, the company said any features causing misattribution were removed on 7 July, that it was reviewing transactions and issuing reversals to affected brand partners, and that it planned to hire a head of compliance.

The latest report follows corrective action by impact.com, which previously told customers that it would reverse certain Phia-related affiliate actions and correct attribution for transactions pending or locked since 20 June 2026.

Phia Affiliate Attribution Controversy: Key Timeline

• 10 December 2025: Bloomberg reports that Phia activated an internal feature labelled “enable coupon auto drop,” which could automatically set affiliate tracking.
• 20 June 2026: The correction period later identified by impact.com begins. Its notice covered Phia-related actions that were pending or had been locked from this date.
• 7 July 2026: Bloomberg contacts Phia about its findings. According to the publication, the “enable coupon auto drop” feature was disabled that day.
• 9 July 2026: Bloomberg publishes its initial investigation, reporting that Phia’s browser extension could claim affiliate attribution without deliberate shopper interaction.
• 29 July 2026: impact.com processes reversals and attribution corrections for eligible Phia-related actions covered by its review.
• 11 August 2026: Bloomberg publishes a follow-up investigation citing internal messages, company data and historical source code. The report alleges that Phia’s founders knew about and encouraged the disputed attribution features. Phia disputes parts of the report and says it is reviewing transactions and issuing reversals.

Note: This is a developing story. Affiverse will continue to follow the reporting and update this timeline as further information, responses, or corrective actions emerge.

Bloomberg Reports Attribution Features Were Purpose-Built

Citing internal Slack messages, people familiar with Phia’s operations and a review of the company’s historical source code, Bloomberg reported that the disputed attribution behaviour was not limited to an accidental change in a recent software release.

The report described an internal feature labelled “enable coupon auto drop,” which could be remotely switched on and off. Bloomberg said the feature was activated on 10 December 2025 and remained active until 7 July 2026, when the publication first contacted Phia for comment.

According to Bloomberg, internal discussions also show Phia’s co-founders communicating with executives and engineers about automatically setting affiliate tracking. The report alleges that this could occur when Phia’s coupon interface appeared, even if the shopper did not select a coupon or otherwise deliberately interact with an affiliate offer.

Bloomberg described two other attribution mechanisms. One, internally called “passive trigger,” reportedly reset a cookie at regular intervals on certain websites after a user had previously interacted with Phia. Another allegedly set a cookie if a shopper clicked anywhere on a page after Phia’s coupon box appeared, including when attempting to close it. Phia declined to comment to Bloomberg on those features.

Bloomberg reported that the functionality affected purchases involving major retailers including Nike, Gap and Nordstrom. The retailers did not provide comments for its report.

Internal Data Indicates a Material Revenue Contribution

An internal revenue chart reviewed by Bloomberg reportedly showed average daily revenue falling from approximately $80,000 to between $10,000 and $28,000 after Phia disabled the disputed functionality and other monetisation features in early July.

Bloomberg also cited a preliminary internal analysis estimating that the disputed practices accounted for approximately 51% of the merchandise value Phia claimed to have generated in June.

Phia disputed that interpretation. A spokesperson said the preliminary analysis used an incorrect methodology that overstated the potential impact. The company also said the decline in revenue partly reflected its decision to disable most monetisation activity at the time, rather than only the attribution features.

impact.com Announces Reversals and Attribution Corrections

In the customer email, sent from impact.com’s product feedback address, the company said its review of Phia’s historical activity had identified issues that could undermine trust within the partnership ecosystem. impact.com did not provide further details about the issues, disclose how many transactions were affected, or quantify the value of the reversals.

According to the notice, impact.com would reverse all Phia-related actions that were pending or had been locked since 20 June 2026. Actions credited to Phia during that period would also have their attribution corrected. Clicks and actions occurring after the correction process would continue to be credited according to each programme’s active contracts. The email did not state that Phia had been permanently removed from the network or that all active partnerships had been terminated. It also did not explain whether any separate restrictions remained in place.

impact.com said it was working with Phia to determine appropriate solutions for publishers and creators that may have experienced an inequitable result. It also encouraged brands to contact Phia directly regarding future partnership matters. The notice represents a more substantial network response than was publicly known when this article was first published. However, impact.com did not use the term “cookie stuffing,” state that Phia had deliberately manipulated attribution, or say that every transaction attributed to the company was invalid.

The dates in Bloomberg’s latest report create a further reconciliation question. impact.com’s customer notice covered Phia actions pending or locked since 20 June 2026, but Bloomberg reports that at least one disputed feature had been active since December 2025. Reporting by Business Insider said the 20 June to 29 July window covered commissions that had not yet been paid and that impact.com did not address payments made before 20 June. It is not yet clear whether earlier transactions will be reviewed separately or whether additional corrections will be required.

Bloomberg Tests Phia Across More Than 50 Retail Websites

Phia was launched in 2025 by Phoebe Gates and Sophia Kianni. Its shopping tools help users compare prices, find discount codes, and search for new and secondhand versions of fashion products. The company can earn affiliate commission when shoppers make qualifying purchases through its platform. Under a standard affiliate journey, a partner generally receives credit after a customer follows its tracking link or deliberately interacts with an approved referral feature.

In its initial investigation published on 9 July, Bloomberg tested Phia’s mobile browser extension across more than 50 retail websites. According to the investigation, the extension could open a retailer’s website in a background tab during checkout and add Phia’s referral information without the user actively selecting an offer or clicking an affiliate link. The report also found instances in which Phia’s tracking information replaced a referral associated with another publisher. This could give Phia attribution for a transaction initially referred through a different affiliate, advertisement or marketing channel. Bloomberg said its findings were consistent with separate testing and code analysis conducted by affiliate marketing researcher Ben Edelman and Capital One Shopping, which operates a competing shopping extension.

New Reporting Challenges Phia’s Original Code-Issue Explanation

After Bloomberg’s initial investigation, Phia said code included in a recent release had caused misattributions for a subset of users. The company said it identified, mitigated and resolved the problem after being notified.

Bloomberg’s subsequent reporting challenges that account. The publication says internal messages and source code show that automatic attribution functionality had existed since December 2025, was purpose-built and could be remotely enabled or disabled.

Phia has not accepted Bloomberg’s full characterisation of events. In a statement provided following the latest report, the company said any features causing misattribution were removed on 7 July. It said it was reviewing every transaction, had begun issuing reversals to affected brand partners and would hire a head of compliance.

The company added that it would learn from the incident. It has not publicly provided a complete account of how the features were approved, how long each attribution method operated or how many transactions may ultimately require correction.

Technical Testing Raises Questions Over User Interaction

In a separate technical analysis, Edelman said Phia’s iOS extension contained a setting that could automatically invoke affiliate links when a shopper reached a retailer’s cart or checkout page. The testing indicated that an affiliate link could load in a second tab without the shopper deliberately interacting with it. Edelman argued that this did not meet affiliate program requirements for voluntary and intentional user interaction.

These conclusions remain Edelman’s interpretation of the extension’s behaviour and its compliance with affiliate agreements. Phia initially maintained that the reported misattributions were caused by a code issue and were fixed after the company was notified. Bloomberg’s subsequent reporting challenges that characterisation.

Why the Reported Behavior Has Been Described as Cookie Stuffing

Cookie stuffing, sometimes called cookie dropping, generally refers to affiliate tracking being placed without a genuine referral or deliberate user action. This can allow a partner to receive commission for a purchase it did not introduce or influence, while potentially replacing the tracking information of the affiliate that originally referred the customer.

The practice has become a greater concern as shopping extensions play a larger role in online purchase journeys. A separate Affiverse explainer on cookie stuffing outlines how the practice can insert or overwrite tracking and create attribution disputes between publishers, advertisers and technology platforms.

Similar questions emerged during the Honey browser extension investigation, which examined whether an extension had provided meaningful value before receiving last-click attribution for a sale. In Phia’s case, Bloomberg reported that the “enable coupon auto drop” feature was switched off on 7 July, the day it first contacted the company. impact.com later announced corrective action, including reversals for pending or locked Phia-related actions from the period under review and corrections to affected attribution.