What each service actually publishes about VoIP numbers and verification codes

The rules that actually exist

Five companies state a number-type rule in their own documentation. These are quoted in full, because the detail matters more than the headline.

Quoted as rules, but not rules

These four are regularly cited as bans. None of them is. The difference between “we recommend” and “you can't” is the whole question when you are deciding what to buy.

The ones that publish the opposite

Three services do publish something about number type, and it runs the other way — they explicitly accommodate non-mobile lines.

• PayPal sends a one-time passcode “by SMS, WhatsApp to your mobile phone number, or via phone call to your landline, or by email”. A landline is explicitly supported.
• Amazon says nothing about number type in its retail two-step verification help. Its KDP documentation does, and only to note that “OTP through calls are not supported on Landlines”.
• eBay publishes a landline exclusion in its account-security help. We read it in a Spanish-locale page that our request was redirected to, so we are not quoting an English sentence we did not see.

The ones that publish nothing

Two of the institutions people most often ask about publish no statement about number type at all, on the pages we checked. That silence is the finding. It is also why the answer to “does my bank accept this number?” is so often an argument between strangers on a forum.

• Chase describes two-step verification as “a one-time code via email or phone” and says nothing about what kind of phone.
• Bank of America publishes no number-type statement on its current security pages. Its older security FAQ now redirects elsewhere.

The Apple quote everyone repeats

Pages selling numbers frequently cite Apple as banning VoIP for verification. Apple did publish that sentence: “You can't use landline or web-based (VOIP) phone services for two-step verification.” The part that never travels with the quote is where it lives — an archived page, marked by Apple as no longer updated, describing two-step verification, the system Apple replaced with two-factor authentication.

On Apple's current two-factor pages there is no number-type rule at all. What Apple publishes today is a delivery method: you “can choose to receive the codes by text message or automated phone call”. Quoting the archived sentence as Apple's present policy is not a fabrication, but it is out of date by a system generation.

What we could not check

Two claims in wide circulation could not be confirmed from the source, so this page does not repeat them. Saying so is the point: an unverified claim is exactly what the rest of this page exists to correct.

• Cash App is widely quoted on Google Voice and Skype numbers. The help article's title exists, but its body is rendered in the browser and could not be read. The only corroboration available is other pages selling numbers.
• Coinbase is cited for a page about landlines and two-step verification. Every request we made was refused by its protection layer, and we observed no redirect. We have nothing first-hand to quote.

What this means if a code isn't arriving

Most services never publish their rule, so the practical test is empirical rather than documentary: a real mobile line is accepted in more places than an internet number, and nobody can promise a particular company will accept a particular number. Why line type decides this explains the mechanism, and what people use a real US number for covers the situations it solves. A Cleat line is a real US mobile number that receives texts and transcribed calls, for $24.99 a month.