Get the weekly research letter
Companies change their terms quietly. We read every version and catch what actually changed. One email a week on the changes that matter and what they mean. No account.
The agreement specifies that California law governs all Terms disputes, that all litigation must be brought in San Francisco County state or federal courts, and that all claims must be filed within one year of arising.
This analysis describes what SoFi's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
This provision requires users outside California to litigate any claims in San Francisco County courts under California substantive law, which may present practical and procedural obstacles for out-of-state users. The combination of California venue, California governing law, and a one-year limitations period creates a layered set of procedural constraints on user claims; whether these are enforceable against consumers in specific states depends on applicable law.
Interpretive note: The practical significance of this venue provision depends on whether the separately referenced arbitration agreement governs most disputes; the document references but does not reproduce the full arbitration clause, limiting assessment of its scope and interaction with this venue provision.
The updated terms establish a time-limited referral promotion running through September 30, 2026, with new eligibility criteria for referrers. To qualify for the higher $75 bonus, referrers must maintain either $100 in combined Invest assets or an eligible direct deposit at the time the referred recipient enrolls. Referrers who do not meet these criteria will receive a lower $50 bonus. The terms also restrict bonuses to new Self-Directed Account openings only, excluding Automated Invest and IRA accounts from referral rewards. Referrals must be completed within the promotion period or they become ineligible. You should verify your account meets the stated asset or direct deposit requirements if you intend to participate in the referral program before the September 30 deadline.
View change record →The updated terms establish new restrictions on how referrers can promote SoFi products and create additional obligations for anyone participating in the referral program. Referrers must now obtain express consent before sending promotional text messages in Washington State, cannot use mass email or commercial advertising to solicit referrals, and must clearly disclose their financial relationship to SoFi in any promotion. The revised terms prohibit making claims about product outcomes, interest rates, or approval odds unless directed to official SoFi webpages, and establish a $10,000 annual cap on cumulative referral and welcome bonuses. Tax reporting obligations now apply, with SoFi reporting bonuses as miscellaneous income to the IRS on Form 1099-MISC. You can review the specific promotional campaign rules for each referral link and ensure compliance with state and platform-specific disclosure requirements before promoting.
View change record →The updated terms establish a Privacy Preference Center that provides granular cookie controls rather than requiring blanket acceptance of all tracking technologies. Previously, SoFi stated that users who did not make a selection agreed to all tracking uses; the revised terms now require users to affirmatively allow functional cookies and other tracking categories. The updated language explicitly describes that functional cookies enable enhanced site functionality and personalization, and that blocking certain cookies may impact site experience. You can now toggle cookie categories on or off individually rather than accepting or declining all tracking as a single choice.
View change record →Under this clause, disputes related to SoFi services are governed by California law and must be litigated in San Francisco County courts, regardless of the user's state of residence. The one-year contractual filing deadline applies in addition to the California venue and governing law requirements.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Governing Law, Venue, and California Jurisdiction and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →Monitoring
SoFi has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 20 platforms.
"These Terms of Use and the License shall be governed in all respects by the substantive laws of the State of California, without regard to its provisions relating to conflict of laws. You agree to submit to the personal and exclusive jurisdiction and venue of the state and federal courts located within San Francisco County, California. You agree that regardless of any statute, regulation, or law to the contrary, any claim or cause of action you may have arising out of or related to use of the SoFi Site, the SoFi App, or these Terms of Use must be filed within one (1) year after such claim or cause of action arose or be forever barred.Excerpt from SoFi's Terms of Service
1. REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Mandatory venue provisions requiring consumers to litigate in a specific distant forum may interact with state consumer protection statutes that prohibit such clauses in consumer contracts. Federal courts have in some contexts scrutinized mandatory distant-forum venue provisions in consumer financial agreements. The CFPB may assess whether such provisions constitute unfair or abusive acts or practices under the Dodd-Frank Act. 2. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. California governing law and venue provisions are common in agreements for California-headquartered companies, but enforceability against out-of-state consumers may depend on whether the mandatory arbitration clause (referenced but not fully reproduced in this document) supersedes the litigation venue provision for most disputes. If arbitration applies to most claims, the practical significance of the court venue provision is reduced but not eliminated. 3. JURISDICTION FLAGS: States with strong consumer protection statutes that prohibit out-of-state venue requirements, such as Montana and California itself for reciprocal protection, may present enforceability challenges. For non-California users, the practical cost of litigating in San Francisco County may affect the viability of small-dollar claims. 4. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Business account holders and employers using SoFi AtWork should assess whether this governing law provision aligns with their own contractual frameworks and whether the California venue requirement is acceptable for their operational and legal structures. 5. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should assess the interaction between the court venue provision and the referenced arbitration agreement, which may govern the primary dispute resolution pathway for most claims. The governing law provision should be evaluated for its effect on state-specific consumer protection rights that may not be waivable under California law for out-of-state consumers.
This provision requires users outside California to litigate any claims in San Francisco County courts under California substantive law, which may present practical and procedural obstacles for out-of-state users. The combination of California venue, California governing law, and a one-year limitations period creates a layered set of procedural constraints on user claims; whether these are enforceable against consumers in specific …
Under this clause, disputes related to SoFi services are governed by California law and must be litigated in San Francisco County courts, regardless of the user's state of residence. The one-year contractual filing deadline applies in addition to the California venue and governing law requirements.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by SoFi.