We are not currently looking to integrate, as Paddle are a competitor. Are you able to summarise the key features you need, and I can see where we are with building those into Upmind? You mention tax compliance, for example.
Thanks
Sara
NovaByteLabs
•
Apr 7
Hello Sara,
Thanks for your response I’ve taken some time to review this more carefully before replying.
I believe there are two main points to address here: classification and consistency.
1. Paddle as a “competitor”
Upmind is positioned as an all-in-one billing and automation platform (including SaaS/ecommerce use cases), whereas Paddle operates as a Merchant of Record (MoR) for digital products handling payments, tax calculation, and compliance.
Paddle does not provide client portals, provisioning systems, support desks, or workflow automation. It does not replace Upmind it complements it by covering a layer that Upmind currently does not.
So describing Paddle as a competitor doesn’t appear accurate in terms of product scope.
2. The actual requirement (not just “tax compliance”)
The request is specifically about Merchant of Record capability, not general tax tooling.
This includes:
Acting as the legal seller for digital goods/software
Handling VAT/sales tax calculation and remittance globally
Managing compliance obligations across jurisdictions
Feeding subscription lifecycle events (renewals, upgrades, cancellations, failed payments) back into Upmind via webhooks
Maintaining a synced client experience between billing and provisioning
Without MoR:
The seller remains liable for VAT/sales tax in every region
Requires external tooling (e.g. Stripe Tax) plus manual compliance workflows
Introduces significant operational and legal overhead for SaaS businesses
This is a structural gap for software vendors operating internationally.
3. Inconsistency in how this was handled
I also noticed that there is already an existing Paddle payment gateway suggestion on the roadmap, currently marked as “Suggested” with multiple upvotes, despite containing minimal detail.
In contrast, this request which includes a full SaaS workflow, technical context, and a clearly defined problem (MoR + compliance) was rejected outright.
From a user perspective, that feels inconsistent:
A low-detail Paddle suggestion remains open
A detailed, use-case-driven request is rejected
The rejection is based on Paddle being a “competitor,” which doesn’t appear to have been applied consistently
4. Positioning vs capability
Upmind is publicly described as a “SaaS ecommerce, billing and automation solution,” which implies support for software and subscription-based businesses.
However, without Merchant of Record support (either via integration or equivalent native functionality), there is a clear gap for SaaS vendors operating internationally.
5. Practical developer perspective
To answer your question directly the issue isn’t a lack of defined features, it’s the absence of a viable path to implement this workflow within Upmind.
If Paddle integration is not something you plan to support, an alternative would be:
Expanding or opening the API to better support external billing providers
Allowing developers to integrate Merchant of Record platforms (like Paddle) cleanly
Providing sufficient webhook/event handling to keep subscriptions and provisioning in sync
Developers like myself would be happy to build and maintain these integrations even open-source them if the platform made this feasible.
At the moment, the limitation is pushing toward a hybrid approach instead:
Customer support → external (Slack/email)
Payments → Paddle (MoR + compliance)
Product access → custom dashboard
Whereas Upmind would ideally sit in the middle of all of that.
Right now, the lack of Merchant of Record support makes that difficult to justify, despite Upmind being strong in other areas.
To clarify direction:
Is Paddle being rejected as a blanket policy decision?
Or was this request closed based on a misunderstanding of its role?
And based on that:
Would it be possible to reopen or re-evaluate this request?
Or clarify what Upmind’s intended solution is for Merchant of Record / global tax compliance for SaaS vendors?
I’m not expecting immediate implementation, but I do believe the current rejection doesn’t fully reflect the use case or the broader need being raised.
Happy to provide further detail or assist with testing if helpful.
Kind regards, Stefan
Editor
Team•
Apr 9
Hi Stefan,
Thank you for your detailed response. The short answer is that we were unclear on the role of Paddle with Upmind. Your response very much helps us understand the use case, and how Upmind/ Paddle would interact more clearly.
Upmind have been through a number of process improvements internally over the last year, including more proactive responses to feature requests - hence why the previous “paddle” request is still sat in “suggested”. These are still being refined, and I apologise for the inconsistency.
Your request highlights a number of gaps in Upmind’s platform functionality (as you mentioned in your original request) which we are working towards addressing. A Global tax compliance solution is in the pipeline; other areas (such as MoR) are being investigated.
Based on the above, we can consider an interim Paddle integration to cover these gaps. I will mark your request as accepted and discuss this with the team.
Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. Your feedback is so valuable to helping us make Upmind a better platform for everyone.
Kind regards
Sara
NovaByteLabs
•
Apr 9
Hello Sara,
Thank you for the update I really appreciate you taking the time to reassess this and move it forward.
It’s great to hear that global tax compliance and MoR are already being explored, and that Paddle is being considered as an interim solution. From a SaaS perspective, that approach makes a lot of sense.
Just to add some practical context from my side:
I’ve worked with Paddle’s APIs and webhook flows before, and one of the biggest advantages for early-stage SaaS is how much operational overhead it removes around tax and compliance. It allows you to focus on the product rather than building out complex billing infrastructure.
By contrast, trying to replicate similar coverage using standard gateways (e.g. Stripe + external tax tooling) quickly becomes fragmented especially when dealing with multiple jurisdictions, evidence requirements, and ongoing compliance. It’s a significant barrier for smaller teams.
This is where I think the combination becomes particularly strong:
Upmind already provides a lot of the pieces developers need providers, subscription management, client portal, support tooling, and a flexible API.
Paired with a Merchant of Record layer like Paddle, that becomes a very compelling setup for SaaS developers combining operational tooling with simplified global billing and compliance.
If it helps at any stage, I’d be happy to:
share example Paddle webhook flows and subscription lifecycle handling
provide testing scenarios (upgrades/downgrades, renewals, edge cases)
or give feedback from a developer integration perspective
Thanks again for the transparency it’s genuinely encouraging to see this being taken seriously.
Hopefully there will be good news from this when talking with your team.
Kind regards, Stefan
NovaByteLabs
•
Mar 19
One additional technical point worth highlighting:
Upmind's provisioning layer is built on Laravel (open source on GitHub). If Upmind is using Laravel Cashier for Stripe payment handling, which is the standard Laravel approach, then Paddle support may already be closer than it appears.
Laravel Cashier has shipped with built-in Paddle Billing support for several versions. The package is split into two:
laravel/cashier — Stripe
laravel/cashier-paddle — Paddle Billing
Both are first-party Laravel packages maintained by the Laravel core team. If your Stripe integration is already using Laravel Cashier, adding Paddle Billing support via cashier-paddle would be significantly less work than building a payment gateway from scratch. The subscription lifecycle management, webhook handling, and billing portal features are all pre-built.
This makes the Paddle integration request even more achievable than it might initially appear. Rather than a full custom payment provider build, it could be as close to a drop-in addition as any payment gateway gets in a Laravel stack.
Happy to assist with testing or feedback if a Paddle integration ever reaches beta.
Log in to comment and vote
Comments6
ISMAIL EL ANTRI
Apr 9
•Merged request
•8 votes
add paddle payment getways
Editor
Apr 7
Hello,
We are not currently looking to integrate, as Paddle are a competitor.
Are you able to summarise the key features you need, and I can see where we are with building those into Upmind? You mention tax compliance, for example.
Thanks
Sara
NovaByteLabs
Apr 7
Hello Sara,
Thanks for your response I’ve taken some time to review this more carefully before replying.
I believe there are two main points to address here: classification and consistency.
1. Paddle as a “competitor”
Upmind is positioned as an all-in-one billing and automation platform (including SaaS/ecommerce use cases), whereas Paddle operates as a Merchant of Record (MoR) for digital products handling payments, tax calculation, and compliance.
Paddle does not provide client portals, provisioning systems, support desks, or workflow automation. It does not replace Upmind it complements it by covering a layer that Upmind currently does not.
So describing Paddle as a competitor doesn’t appear accurate in terms of product scope.
2. The actual requirement (not just “tax compliance”)
The request is specifically about Merchant of Record capability, not general tax tooling.
This includes:
Acting as the legal seller for digital goods/software
Handling VAT/sales tax calculation and remittance globally
Managing compliance obligations across jurisdictions
Feeding subscription lifecycle events (renewals, upgrades, cancellations, failed payments) back into Upmind via webhooks
Maintaining a synced client experience between billing and provisioning
Without MoR:
The seller remains liable for VAT/sales tax in every region
Requires external tooling (e.g. Stripe Tax) plus manual compliance workflows
Introduces significant operational and legal overhead for SaaS businesses
This is a structural gap for software vendors operating internationally.
3. Inconsistency in how this was handled
I also noticed that there is already an existing Paddle payment gateway suggestion on the roadmap, currently marked as “Suggested” with multiple upvotes, despite containing minimal detail.
In contrast, this request which includes a full SaaS workflow, technical context, and a clearly defined problem (MoR + compliance) was rejected outright.
From a user perspective, that feels inconsistent:
A low-detail Paddle suggestion remains open
A detailed, use-case-driven request is rejected
The rejection is based on Paddle being a “competitor,” which doesn’t appear to have been applied consistently
4. Positioning vs capability
Upmind is publicly described as a “SaaS ecommerce, billing and automation solution,” which implies support for software and subscription-based businesses.
However, without Merchant of Record support (either via integration or equivalent native functionality), there is a clear gap for SaaS vendors operating internationally.
5. Practical developer perspective
To answer your question directly the issue isn’t a lack of defined features, it’s the absence of a viable path to implement this workflow within Upmind.
If Paddle integration is not something you plan to support, an alternative would be:
Expanding or opening the API to better support external billing providers
Allowing developers to integrate Merchant of Record platforms (like Paddle) cleanly
Providing sufficient webhook/event handling to keep subscriptions and provisioning in sync
Developers like myself would be happy to build and maintain these integrations even open-source them if the platform made this feasible.
At the moment, the limitation is pushing toward a hybrid approach instead:
Customer support → external (Slack/email)
Payments → Paddle (MoR + compliance)
Product access → custom dashboard
Whereas Upmind would ideally sit in the middle of all of that.
Right now, the lack of Merchant of Record support makes that difficult to justify, despite Upmind being strong in other areas.
To clarify direction:
Is Paddle being rejected as a blanket policy decision?
Or was this request closed based on a misunderstanding of its role?
And based on that:
Would it be possible to reopen or re-evaluate this request?
Or clarify what Upmind’s intended solution is for Merchant of Record / global tax compliance for SaaS vendors?
I’m not expecting immediate implementation, but I do believe the current rejection doesn’t fully reflect the use case or the broader need being raised.
Happy to provide further detail or assist with testing if helpful.
Kind regards,
Stefan
Editor
Apr 9
Hi Stefan,
Thank you for your detailed response. The short answer is that we were unclear on the role of Paddle with Upmind. Your response very much helps us understand the use case, and how Upmind/ Paddle would interact more clearly.
Upmind have been through a number of process improvements internally over the last year, including more proactive responses to feature requests - hence why the previous “paddle” request is still sat in “suggested”. These are still being refined, and I apologise for the inconsistency.
Your request highlights a number of gaps in Upmind’s platform functionality (as you mentioned in your original request) which we are working towards addressing. A Global tax compliance solution is in the pipeline; other areas (such as MoR) are being investigated.
Based on the above, we can consider an interim Paddle integration to cover these gaps. I will mark your request as accepted and discuss this with the team.
Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. Your feedback is so valuable to helping us make Upmind a better platform for everyone.
Kind regards
Sara
NovaByteLabs
Apr 9
Hello Sara,
Thank you for the update I really appreciate you taking the time to reassess this and move it forward.
It’s great to hear that global tax compliance and MoR are already being explored, and that Paddle is being considered as an interim solution. From a SaaS perspective, that approach makes a lot of sense.
Just to add some practical context from my side:
I’ve worked with Paddle’s APIs and webhook flows before, and one of the biggest advantages for early-stage SaaS is how much operational overhead it removes around tax and compliance. It allows you to focus on the product rather than building out complex billing infrastructure.
By contrast, trying to replicate similar coverage using standard gateways (e.g. Stripe + external tax tooling) quickly becomes fragmented especially when dealing with multiple jurisdictions, evidence requirements, and ongoing compliance. It’s a significant barrier for smaller teams.
This is where I think the combination becomes particularly strong:
Upmind already provides a lot of the pieces developers need providers, subscription management, client portal, support tooling, and a flexible API.
Paired with a Merchant of Record layer like Paddle, that becomes a very compelling setup for SaaS developers combining operational tooling with simplified global billing and compliance.
If it helps at any stage, I’d be happy to:
share example Paddle webhook flows and subscription lifecycle handling
provide testing scenarios (upgrades/downgrades, renewals, edge cases)
or give feedback from a developer integration perspective
Thanks again for the transparency it’s genuinely encouraging to see this being taken seriously.
Hopefully there will be good news from this when talking with your team.
Kind regards,
Stefan
NovaByteLabs
Mar 19
One additional technical point worth highlighting:
Upmind's provisioning layer is built on Laravel (open source on GitHub). If Upmind is using Laravel Cashier for Stripe payment handling, which is the standard Laravel approach, then Paddle support may already be closer than it appears.
Laravel Cashier has shipped with built-in Paddle Billing support for several versions. The package is split into two:
laravel/cashier— Stripelaravel/cashier-paddle— Paddle BillingBoth are first-party Laravel packages maintained by the Laravel core team. If your Stripe integration is already using Laravel Cashier, adding Paddle Billing support via
cashier-paddlewould be significantly less work than building a payment gateway from scratch. The subscription lifecycle management, webhook handling, and billing portal features are all pre-built.This makes the Paddle integration request even more achievable than it might initially appear. Rather than a full custom payment provider build, it could be as close to a drop-in addition as any payment gateway gets in a Laravel stack.
Happy to assist with testing or feedback if a Paddle integration ever reaches beta.