People who prepared federal tax returns on the TaxAct or TaxSlayer websites may be covered by a proposed class action alleging Google’s Analytics pixel collected their tax information without consent; a hearing on class certification is set for November 19, 2026. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes an active class action lawsuit. The statements below are unproven allegations. Google has not been found liable, and there is nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
Latest Update: Class Certification Hearing November 19, 2026
The next major step in Smith v. Google, LLC (Case No. 5:23-cv-03527, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division) is a ruling on whether the case can proceed as a class action. The plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification on August 1, 2026, Google filed its opposition on September 2, and the plaintiffs filed their reply on October 9. Judge P. Casey Pitts has set the hearing for November 19, 2026 at 3:00 p.m. A joint filing on October 5, 2026 states that the hearing date and the case deadlines after it are unchanged.The motion narrows who the plaintiffs want to represent. It asks the court to certify classes of people who completed their federal tax return on the TaxAct website from January 10, 2018, or on the TaxSlayer website from February 1, 2013, through the present. It does not include H&R Block filers. The case is consolidated with a related action, No. 5:23-cv-04191.
The case cleared its first major hurdle in June 2024, when Judge Pitts denied Google's motion to dismiss. Google argued that the tax-prep companies consented to Google Analytics by installing it; the court found that argument drew too many inferences in Google's favor and held that tax filers plausibly had a reasonable expectation that their tax information would stay private. No class has been certified, no trial date appears in the recent scheduling filings, and there is no settlement, claim form or money available. This page will be updated after the court rules on class certification.
What Is This About?
The class action, filed on July 14, 2023, accuses Google of wiretapping electronic communications on major online tax-filing websites. According to the complaint, Google Analytics tracking pixels embedded in the websites of H&R Block, TaxAct, and TaxSlayer transmitted taxpayers' sensitive financial information to Google as people filed their taxes online — including income, refund amounts, filing status, and scholarship information.The complaint grew out of a July 2023 U.S. Senate investigation, "Attacks on Tax Privacy: How the Tax Prep Industry Enabled Meta to Harvest Millions of Taxpayers' Sensitive Data," which reported that major tax-prep companies had shared taxpayer data with Meta and Google through tracking pixels. The complaint alleges TaxAct and TaxSlayer disclosed to Senate investigators that adjusted-gross-income and refund amounts were sent to Google, and notes that federal law makes unauthorized disclosure of tax-return information by a preparer a crime (26 U.S.C. § 7216). Google has denied wrongdoing, and the allegations remain unproven.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
How the Alleged Tracking Worked
The complaint centers on the Google Analytics tracking pixel — an invisible 1×1 web bug installed by default when a website uses Google Analytics. When a visitor loads a page carrying the code, the pixel collects information about how the visitor interacted with the page — clicks, scrolls, searches, form interactions, and downloads, up to roughly 200 different metrics — and transmits it to Google in real time, where it is processed into reports.The plaintiff alleges Google benefits from this arrangement well beyond the analytics reports it gives website owners: the data feeds Google's advertising algorithms and its broader profile of users across the web. While Google says the information is pseudonymous and that its policies prohibit customers from passing it identifying or sensitive data, the complaint cites a Stanford and Princeton study finding that browsing-history data of the kind Google collects can be de-anonymized, and alleges Google admitted it never contacted or suspended any of the tax-prep companies over the transmissions.
Who Is Covered by the Proposed Class?
The original complaint proposed a nationwide class of people who used online tax-preparation sites such as H&R Block, TaxAct or TaxSlayer while the Google pixel was installed, plus an Illinois subclass. The plaintiffs' August 1, 2026 motion for class certification is narrower. It asks the court to certify:• Nationwide classes of all individuals in the United States who completed the process of preparing their federal tax return on the TaxAct website from January 10, 2018 through the present, or on the TaxSlayer website from February 1, 2013 through the present, with separate TaxAct and TaxSlayer subclasses.
• A California class of individuals in California who prepared their federal returns on either site during those periods.
• A Florida class of individuals in Florida who prepared their federal returns on either site during those periods.
H&R Block filers are not part of the classes in the motion, and the motion does not seek an Illinois subclass. The court has not ruled, the plaintiffs reserved the right to modify the definitions, and the final scope of any class could differ.
The Legal Claims
The complaint brings claims under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (Cal. Penal Code §§ 631, 632, and 635), the federal Wiretap Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et seq.), and common-law and California constitutional privacy theories, including intrusion upon seclusion. The class certification motion seeks to certify claims under the federal Wiretap Act (including 18 U.S.C. § 2512), California Penal Code §§ 631(a), 632, 635 and the pen-register provision § 638.51, and the Florida Security of Communications Act. The plaintiff seeks statutory damages — up to $5,000 per violation under CIPA and the greater of $10,000 or $100 per day under the Wiretap Act — plus injunctive relief and attorneys' fees. All of these are requests tied to unproven allegations; no liability has been found and no money has been awarded.Is There a Settlement or Claim Form?
Not in this case. There is no settlement fund, no claim form and no payout in Smith v. Google. The case is at the class certification stage.A related but separate case over the same Senate-report pixel scandal did settle: TaxAct paid $14.95M to resolve claims that it (rather than Google) shared customer data through Meta and Google pixels. That settlement's claim deadline passed in September 2024 — see our coverage of the TaxAct class action settlement. Google has also settled other major privacy cases recently, including the $68M Google Assistant privacy settlement, whose claims closed August 27, 2026 and which won final approval on October 13, 2026.
If Smith v. Google settles or produces a plaintiffs' verdict, a formal claims process with its own eligibility rules and deadlines would be announced — we will update this page if that happens.
Read the Complaint
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the latest update in the Google tax-filing pixel lawsuit?
The plaintiffs moved on August 1, 2026 to certify nationwide, California and Florida classes of people who prepared their federal tax returns on the TaxAct or TaxSlayer websites. Google opposed the motion on September 2, the plaintiffs replied on October 9, and Judge P. Casey Pitts has set the hearing for November 19, 2026 in San Jose. No class has been certified and no trial date appears in the recent scheduling filings. There is no settlement and no claim form.
What does Smith v. Google allege?
The complaint alleges that Google Analytics tracking pixels embedded on online tax-preparation websites — including H&R Block, TaxAct, and TaxSlayer — transmitted taxpayers' sensitive financial information to Google without consent, including income, refund amounts, and filing status. It brings claims under the federal Wiretap Act, the California Invasion of Privacy Act, and common-law privacy theories. These are unproven allegations; Google has denied wrongdoing.
Who could be covered by the proposed class?
In the August 1, 2026 motion for class certification, the plaintiffs ask the court to certify classes of individuals who completed their federal tax return on the TaxAct website from January 10, 2018 or on the TaxSlayer website from February 1, 2013, through the present: nationwide classes, plus California and Florida classes for state-law claims. The motion does not include H&R Block filers. The court has not ruled, and the definitions can change.
Is there a Google tax-filing settlement or claim form?
There is no settlement fund, no claim form and no payout in this case, and Google has not been found liable. The next step is the November 19, 2026 class certification hearing. A related but separate case against TaxAct itself produced a $14.95M settlement whose claim deadline passed in September 2024.
What happens next in the Google tax-filing pixel case?
Judge Pitts will hear the motion for class certification on November 19, 2026. If a class is certified, class members would receive a court-approved notice; if the case settles or the plaintiffs win at trial, any claims process would come with its own eligibility rules and deadlines. There is nothing to claim now. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
Sources
• Class Action Complaint, Smith v. Google, LLC, No. 5:23-cv-03527 (N.D. Cal., filed July 14, 2023).• Order Denying Motion to Dismiss, Smith v. Google, LLC, No. 5:23-cv-03527-PCP (N.D. Cal. June 3, 2024).
• Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification, Dkt. 173 (filed August 1, 2026); Google’s opposition, Dkt. 180 (September 2, 2026); Plaintiffs’ reply, Dkt. 186 (October 9, 2026); Stipulation to Modify Case Deadlines, Dkt. 184 (October 5, 2026); Clerk’s notice resetting hearing time, Dkt. 189 (October 20, 2026), via CourtListener.
• Case page, Smith v. Google, LLC, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (cand.uscourts.gov).
• U.S. Senate report, Attacks on Tax Privacy: How the Tax Prep Industry Enabled Meta to Harvest Millions of Taxpayers' Sensitive Data (July 2023).
