GDPR Credit Card Data: Compliance and Customer Safety
Unlike other forms of personal data, payment information carries exceptional risk. The combination of financial fraud potential and identity theft makes credit card data a high-risk personal data category under the GDPR. This sensitivity means standard compliance approaches won’t suffice. Organisations must navigate dual regulatory frameworks, implementing both GDPR privacy protections and PCI DSS security requirements simultaneously.
This guide provides the essential framework for achieving complete GDPR compliance with credit card data. We’ll cover the legal requirements, implementation strategies, and enforcement realities that determine success or failure in this high-stakes compliance area.
Key Takeaways
• The lawful basis for processing payment data depends on the purpose. Processing a transaction is typically based on contract necessity, while storing card data for future purchases requires explicit consent.
• Payment card information is high-risk personal data under GDPR, requiring enhanced protections and dual compliance with PCI DSS security standards. It is not, however, classified as “special category” data.
• Data subject rights are strong but not absolute; for example, the right to erasure can be overridden by legal obligations such as financial record-keeping laws. Organisations must notify supervisory authorities within
• 72 hours of any personal data breach is likely to risk individuals’ rights and freedoms.
Understanding GDPR Classification of Credit Card Data
The General Data Protection Regulation treats credit card information as a distinct category of personal data with heightened protection requirements. Credit card numbers, CVV codes, expiry dates, and cardholder names unequivocally fall under GDPR Article 4’s definition of personal data, as they directly identify natural persons for payment processing purposes. While it is considered high-risk personal data, it is not classified as a “special category” of data under Article 9 of the GDPR, which covers sensitive information like health, racial origin, or biometric data.
The French Data Protection Authority (CNIL) has explicitly classified payment data as personal information used to identify individuals in the context of payment services. This classification isn’t merely academic; it has practical implications for how organisations must handle such data throughout the entire processing lifecycle.
Payment card data carries a high risk profile due to the potential for financial fraud and identity theft. Unlike standard personal data, compromised credit card information can result in immediate financial harm to data subjects. This reality has shaped regulatory approaches, with authorities treating payment data breaches as among the most serious privacy violations.
The sensitivity classification also reflects changing consumer expectations. Research indicates that 68% of French consumers prioritise data protection when selecting e-commerce platforms, demonstrating that payment data security has become a competitive differentiator rather than merely a compliance requirement.
Legal Framework for Payment Data
Under GDPR’s risk-based approach, credit card data processing falls under stricter requirements than regular personal data categories. Data controllers must implement appropriate measures that account for the specific risks associated with the processing of payment information. This includes enhanced security measures and rigorous consent procedures where consent is the appropriate legal basis. The standard 72-hour breach notification timeline applies; however, the high-risk nature of payment data means that a breach is more likely to meet the threshold requiring notification.
The classification also means that standard data protection measures may prove insufficient for payment card data. Organisations must implement technical measures and organisational measures specifically designed to protect the vital interests of data subjects in financial contexts.
Legal Basis Requirements Under GDPR Article 6
Under GDPR, all processing of personal data must have a lawful basis. For payment data, the basis depends on the specific processing activity. Consent is one possible legal basis, but it is not the only one, nor is it always the most appropriate.
Many payment processing activities rely on contract necessity (Article 6(1)(b)) or legitimate interest (Article 6(1)(f)). For example, processing a customer’s card details to complete a one-time purchase is necessary to fulfil a contract. Storing payment data for recurring billing may also be justified as a contractual necessity.
However, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) has issued clear guidance that for the optional storage of credit card data to facilitate future purchases (e.g., “one-click” checkout), the only valid legal basis is explicit consent under Article 6(1)(a). The EDPB’s reasoning is that customer convenience does not outweigh data subject rights when dealing with high-risk payment information, and such storage is not strictly necessary for the performance of the initial contract.
Consent Standards for Payment Data
When consent is the required legal basis for processing credit card data, it must meet GDPR’s highest standards. Data subjects must provide consent that is freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous. In practical terms, this means:
• Pre-ticked checkboxes are prohibited for payment data consent. Organisations must require affirmative action from users to indicate their agreement to data storage.
• Bundled consent is forbidden. Consent for storing credit card data cannot be combined with general terms of service acceptance or other processing consents. Each consent must be distinguishable and separately obtainable.
• Clear record-keeping is mandatory. Data controllers must maintain detailed logs of when and how consent was obtained, including the specific language used to present it to data subjects.
• Withdrawal must be straightforward. The process for withdrawing consent must be as simple as providing it initially, and withdrawal cannot result in service penalties beyond the loss of stored payment convenience.
Contract Performance and Ongoing Services
For many routine payment operations, contract performance under Article 6(1)(b) is the most appropriate lawful basis. This applies when processing is necessary to fulfil a contract with the customer, such as completing a purchase they initiated or managing an active subscription.
This basis covers the immediate processing of payment data to finalise a transaction. For ongoing services, such as subscriptions, contract performance can justify processing payments according to the agreed-upon schedule. However, this basis has strict boundaries and does not permit storing additional payment methods beyond those specified in the contract or for purposes outside of fulfilling the contract, such as optional future purchases.
Legal obligations, vital interests, and public interest grounds do not typically provide valid reasons for retaining credit card data in most commercial contexts.
GDPR vs PCI DSS Compliance for Credit Card Data
Organisations processing credit card data from EU residents must navigate two distinct but overlapping regulatory frameworks. The General Data Protection Regulation governs data protection and privacy rights for all personal data of EU citizens, while PCI DSS focuses specifically on securing payment card data during processing, transmission, and storage.
Understanding the relationship between these frameworks is crucial. GDPR emphasises legal bases, data subject rights, and privacy governance. PCI DSS, an industry standard, mandates specific technical and organisational security measures. Compliance with one does not guarantee compliance with the other; both must be satisfied independently. In practice, many PCI DSS controls (e.g., encryption, access management) help meet GDPR’s Article 32 security requirements.
The regulatory scope differs significantly. GDPR applies to any organisation processing personal data of EU residents, regardless of location. PCI DSS applies to any entity that handles payment card data. For organisations serving EU customers, both regulations apply simultaneously.
Security Measures Under Both Frameworks
| Security Measure | GDPR Requirement | PCI DSS Requirement |
| Data Encryption | Strongly recommended as an appropriate technical measure based on risk, but not universally mandatory. | Mandatory for payment card data at rest and in transit. |
| Access Controls | Required as part of “appropriate measures” to limit data access. | Provides detailed requirements for role-based access systems. |
| Two-Factor Authentication | Not explicitly specified, but falls under general security requirements. | Explicitly required for certain access scenarios. |
| Network Security | Encompassed as part of implementing “appropriate technical measures.” | Requires secure network architectures, firewalls, and segmentation. |
| Regular Testing | Requires regular testing of security measures. | Mandates specific penetration testing and vulnerability scanning schedules. |
Organisations must implement comprehensive security programs that satisfy both sets of requirements, often requiring more stringent measures than either framework would demand individually.
Data Retention and Storage Requirements
GDPR’s data minimisation principle applies with particular force to credit card data. Organisations must collect and store only the payment information strictly necessary for the stated purposes, aligning with the storage limitation requirement under GDPR Article 5(1)(e).
Retention periods must be clearly communicated to data subjects. Vague statements like “as long as necessary” are insufficient. Organisations should specify definite retention periods or the criteria used to determine them (e.g., “We keep payment data for six years to meet tax obligations”).
Automatic deletion mechanisms should be implemented to purge payment data when it is no longer needed or when consent (if it was the legal basis) is withdrawn. This is required unless another lawful basis, such as a legal obligation, justifies its continued retention.
The technical implementation of data retention limits requires careful planning. Organisations must balance business needs with GDPR’s minimisation requirements, often using anonymisation or pseudonymisation for transaction records while deleting actual payment card details.
Customer Payment Data Management
Customer payment data requires ongoing management. Organisations must regularly review stored payment information to ensure it remains necessary for its original purpose. This review should identify data that can be deleted or anonymised.
Data controllers must also consider the interaction between GDPR retention limits and other legal obligations. Financial regulations may require retaining certain transaction records for specific periods, but these requirements typically don’t extend to retaining full credit card numbers or security codes.
Data Subject Rights for Payment Information
Data subjects enjoy comprehensive rights regarding their payment information under GDPR. These rights are strong, but not absolute, and take on particular significance for credit card data due to its sensitivity.
• Right of access: Allows customers to request copies of all stored payment data.
• Right to rectification: Enables the correction of inaccurate credit card information.
• Right to erasure: Requires deletion of payment data when the legal basis for its retention no longer exists. However, this right is not absolute and can be overridden by legal obligations (e.g., tax laws) or the need to fulfil contractual obligations.
• Right to data portability: Applies to transaction history when processing is based on consent or contract. For security reasons, sensitive data like full credit card numbers is typically excluded.
• Right to object: Mainly applies when processing is based on legitimate interests or public interest, not when it is necessary for the performance of a contract.
Implementation of Data Subject Rights
Organisations must build systems capable of efficiently locating and managing payment data to respond to data subject requests. This often necessitates comprehensive data mapping and indexing.
Response timeframes must meet GDPR’s one-month requirement while incorporating secure verification procedures to prevent unauthorised access to payment information.
Breach Notification Requirements
GDPR imposes strict notification requirements for data breaches involving payment information. Organisations must notify the relevant supervisory authority within 72 hours of becoming aware of a personal data breach, unless it is unlikely to pose a risk to individuals’ rights and freedoms. Awareness begins when there is a reasonable degree of certainty that a breach has occurred.
For high-risk breaches, which most credit card compromises are, individual customers must also be notified without undue delay.
Security incidents involving payment card data often trigger additional contractual notification requirements under PCI DSS from payment card brands and acquiring banks. These timelines are often stricter, sometimes requiring notification within 24 hours or immediately.
Breach Documentation and Response
Proper breach documentation must detail the categories of data subjects affected, the probable consequences, and the remedial actions taken to mitigate the breach. For payment data breaches, this documentation should address both immediate security concerns and ongoing risk mitigation measures.
Organisations should prepare breach response procedures that account for the dual requirements of GDPR and PCI DSS. While PCI DSS mandates that an incident response plan exists, the specific reporting requirements are often defined by the card brands and acquiring banks.
Implementation Best Practices
• Granular Consent: Provide specific options for optional data uses, such as storing payment methods for future use. Consent is not required for immediate transaction processing necessary for the performance of the contract.
• Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs): Perform DPIAs before any high-risk processing starts and review them when significant changes occur.
• Staff Training: Ensure personnel understand both GDPR privacy obligations and PCI DSS security standards.
• Records of Processing: Maintain comprehensive records of processing activities as required by Article 30 of the GDPR. More detailed “audit trails” may be a specific requirement under PCI DSS.
Third-Party Payment Processor Management
Organisations using third-party payment processors must ensure that Data Processing Agreements clearly articulate GDPR obligations. Due diligence on payment service providers should include reviewing their GDPR compliance programs, security certifications, and incident response capabilities. Organisations remain liable for their processors’ GDPR compliance, making careful vendor selection crucial.
Joint controller arrangements may apply when multiple parties determine the purposes and means of payment data processing. These arrangements require a clear allocation of GDPR responsibilities and coordinated compliance efforts.
Penalties and Enforcement
Non-compliance with GDPR credit card data requirements carries severe consequences, including administrative fines of up to €20 million or 4% of the company’s global annual turnover, whichever is higher.
PCI DSS violations compound GDPR penalties with additional consequences, including fines from payment card brands, increased transaction fees, and potential loss of payment processing privileges. The combined impact of dual non-compliance can threaten business viability.
Beyond direct financial penalties, payment data breaches create lasting reputational damage and customer trust issues. The competitive impact of data protection failures often exceeds the cost of regulatory fines, making compliance a business imperative.
Regulatory Enforcement Trends
Supervisory authorities increasingly prioritise payment data compliance in their investigation and enforcement activities. Organisations should expect enhanced scrutiny of their payment data practices, including a detailed examination of consent mechanisms, security measures, and the implementation of data subject rights.
FAQ
Can I store credit card data without explicit consent?
It depends on the purpose. Storing card data to process a current transaction or manage a recurring subscription can be based on contract necessity under GDPR Article 6(1)(b). However, for the optional storage of credit card data for future purchases (e.g., “Save card for next time”), the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) guidance states that explicit consent is the appropriate legal basis for this purpose.
Does PCI DSS compliance satisfy GDPR requirements?
No, PCI DSS and GDPR are separate frameworks. The PCI DSS focuses on technical security for payment card data, whereas the GDPR is a broader privacy law. While complying with PCI DSS can help meet some of GDPR’s technical security requirements under Article 32, it does not guarantee full GDPR compliance.
How long can I store customer payment data?
Data should only be stored for as long as necessary for the purpose it was collected. If the basis was consent for optional storage, it should be deleted when consent is withdrawn. However, organisations may be required by other laws (e.g., tax, anti-money laundering) to retain transaction records for several years (often 6-10 years). This legal obligation can override a request for erasure under GDPR.