National Advertising Division Finds Certain Deel Payroll and HRIS Claims Supported; Recommends Others be Modified or Discontinued

New York, NY – August 8, 2024 – In a challenge brought by competitor People Center, Inc. d/b/a Rippling, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that Deel, Inc., in connection with its Payroll and Human Resource Information System (HRIS), provided a reasonable basis for certain claims, including Deel’s “save up to $20,000 per year” claim and accompanying chart, as well as the claim that Deel has an “industry leading global payroll software.”

However, National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that Deel modify or discontinue certain other claims, including comparative claims versus Rippling’s native payroll software, legal compliance, and customer support. 

The parties are human resources and payroll service providers that offer multiple services.

Native and In-House Payroll Claims

Rippling challenged claims about “native” and “in-house” payroll systems that appeared in charts on Deel’s website:

• “Payroll service is native and operated in-house in every country – Deel ✔, Rippling X”
• “Payroll service is native and operated in-house in every country – Deel ✔ Yes, Rippling X No, they currently use partners in some countries.”

NAD determined that customers could reasonably take away the message that native payroll includes native payroll software. Further, customers may reasonably take away the message that Rippling does not offer in-house and native payroll in all the countries in which it offers global payroll (outside of employer of record).

Therefore, NAD recommended that Deel modify these claims by clearly and conspicuously defining what “native” means and clarifying that the comparison with Rippling also includes countries where they offer payroll as part of their employer of record services. 

Industry-Leading Payroll Claim

Deel claims on its website to have “[i]ndustry leading global payroll software” and, in a smaller font, “Deel is a leader in multi-country payroll and contractor payments, according to G2 user reviews.”

NAD determined that the phrase “global payroll software” means that Deel offers payroll software globally—whether that is in-house or through a third-party. Further, NAD considered the language and the context in which the “industry leading” language appears and concluded the claim does not convey a superlative message. Consumers are likely to take away the message that Deel is among the top in the industry, but not necessarily the best. 

Since the record indicates that Deel has significant revenue, market presence, and a large global footprint, and there is no dispute that Deel and Rippling are among the many leaders in the global payroll market, NAD concluded that this claim was not false or misleading.

HRIS Comparative Claims

Rippling challenged claims on Deel’s website that customers can “[s]witch to Deel HR and save up to $20,000 per year.” An accompanying chart below the claim lists seven product features with Rippling and Deel displaying checkmarks for each feature. The chart states that Deel is “Free for companies with less than 200 employees” while Rippling costs “$8 employee/month.”

NAD concluded that because both products offer the touted features, it is not misleading to characterize Deel’s software as having those product features and that the product comparison chart is not misleading.

HRIS Superlative Claims

NAD determined that there was no evidence in the record to support an unqualified claim that Deel is #1 in the market. Therefore, NAD recommended that Deel discontinue the claims:

• “The market leader in the Global HR space.”
• “Build confidence in your compliance with the #1 Global HR platform.”

Preference Claim

NAD determined that data relied on by Deel is not a good fit for its claim that “Teams prefer Deel over Rippling for global HR and Payroll” because it did not indicate a preference for one product over another. Accordingly, NAD recommended that the claim be discontinued. 

Compliance Claims

Rippling challenged claims about legal compliance that appeared in charts on Deel’s website:

• “Network of 200+ local legal hiring experts around the world -- ✔ Yes, Rippling X No”
• “Compliance document collection for contractors, on top of EOR, constantly reviewed and updated.”

NAD determined that in context it is reasonable to take away the message that Rippling has an inferior network of legal experts around the world, and it does not offer compliance document collection. Since Deel submitted no evidence in support of these two claims, NAD recommended it discontinue the comparative part of these claims as they relate to Rippling and cease conveying the messages that there are legal risks associated with using Rippling products and that Rippling’s products are not compliant. 

NAD noted that nothing in its decision would prevent Deel from advertising its network of local legal hiring experts or comparing its compliance services to Rippling’s so long as they do not claim that Rippling lacks a network of 200+ local legal hiring experts around the world or compliance document collection for contractors.

Customer Support Claims

NAD determined that the comparative claim that Rippling does not offer multi-channel support is not false or misleading.

However, NAD concluded that the unqualified claim, “Deel’s support is in-house, reliable, and faster than Rippling” is not supported and recommended that it be discontinued or modified to make clear the circumstances and times when its support would be faster and avoid conveying the message that Rippling’s customer support is unreliable.

Further, NAD determined that Deel’s claim “Same level of service in every country with centralized communications – Deel ✔ Yes, Rippling X No, as they use partners in some places,” is not supported because there is no evidence about the level of service provided by Rippling in any country. Therefore, NAD recommended that the claim be discontinued.

During the proceeding Deel permanently discontinued and modified certain claims. Therefore, NAD did not review these claims on their merits and will treat the claims, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued.

In its advertiser statement, Deel stated that it will comply with NAD’s decision. 

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. Per NAD/NARB procedures, this release shall not be used for advertising or promotional purposes.