PPC consultant David Melamed says Google Ads invalidated a promotional credit worth $3,200 more than a month after his client had already spent it, with no way to appeal the reversal. Melamed described a second, similar case affecting another of his accounts in the same short window. For agencies that budget campaigns around promised credit, a retroactive clawback turns what looked like free spend into an unplanned bill.
Melamed laid out the first case on LinkedIn: Google issued the promotional credit to encourage a new advertiser to spend, the advertiser spent the qualifying amount, and Google later marked the credit “Invalidated” in the account. He posted a screenshot of the invalidated credit and said the advertiser “likely would not have spend the first $3200 if not for the credit.” In a second case, Melamed said Google gave the reason that the billing profile originating the account had come from his own manager account (MCC), a setup detail unrelated to the advertiser’s own spending behavior.
These are two reported incidents from one consultant’s client accounts, not evidence of a systemic Google Ads practice. Melamed said the pattern “isn’t super rare” and “happens often enough” in his experience, but that characterization comes from his own caseload rather than any disclosed figure from Google. Google Ads liaison Ginny Marvin responded to the LinkedIn post, writing, “Thank you for bringing this to our attention, David. I’ve passed this along to the team.” Google has not confirmed a cause, announced a policy change, or disputed the specifics Melamed described.
The gap between acknowledgment and resolution is the part worth watching. Google’s reply establishes that the company saw the report; it does not establish why the credits were invalidated, whether the eligibility terms were violated, or whether a fix is coming. Advertisers evaluating a similar credit today have no published criteria for what triggers a later reversal, which means the incentive carries a risk that is not disclosed at signup.
Search Engine Roundtable first reported Melamed’s account, including his full LinkedIn post and the screenshot of the invalidated credit. The outlet noted that Google Ads promotional credits exist specifically to push new and existing advertisers to spend more on the platform, which is what makes a retroactive clawback different from an advertiser simply losing eligibility before spending. Melamed’s complaint centers on credit removed after the qualifying spend already happened, when the money is gone regardless of the outcome.
The billing-profile detail Melamed cited is worth isolating for agencies running client accounts through an MCC. If Google can trace a new advertiser’s account setup back to an agency’s manager account and treat that as grounds to invalidate a credit, the risk extends beyond the advertiser to whichever agency configured the account. Agencies that regularly onboard new clients through their own MCC should ask their Google Ads rep, in writing, whether that setup pattern affects credit eligibility before recommending a client rely on a promotional credit as part of a launch budget.
Until Google publishes clearer eligibility terms or a way to contest an invalidated credit, treat promotional credits as provisional rather than guaranteed. Agencies should document credit terms and screenshots at issuance, track the date spend clears the credit threshold, and flag any account where an MCC or shared billing profile set up the client, since that is the specific mechanism Melamed says triggered one reversal.
Search Engine Roundtable, in a report published September 10, 2026, first detailed David Melamed’s account of the invalidated Google Ads credits.
