AI Agents Are Getting the Buy Button. The Pause Is Moving Up the Price Tag

Muse, Meta’s personal AI agent, drew more than an estimated 2.5 million downloads within two weeks, according to market intelligence firm Sensor Tower. The agent, which can sit inside apps like Instagram and WhatsApp to act on behalf of consumers, also launched with guardrails. For sensitive tasks, like buying something or sending an email, Muse first checks with the person for approval. 

While agents increasingly do things on our behalf, many of us still want a moment to make the final call before anything happens, especially when more money is at stake. Too much can go wrong. It’s something that has long been true in financial services: For many, there’s an unease about outsourcing certain money decisions to the point that consumers add friction on purpose at times (e.g. resist auto-paying a credit card bill). More interestingly, it’s a theme running through answers to our Yours in Finance interview series, which asks banking and fintech leaders the same seven questions. Those interviewed over the last few months say they like a pause for control, for mindful spending or so they can manage risk for higher amounts.

Jason Henrichs, CEO of Alloy Labs and co-host of Breaking Banks, described the broader reluctance toward AI agents moving money this way: “There is a reason people hesitate to do auto pay on things. They want to have the approval…agentic can automatically set things up, but the human will still need to be in the loop, and they will always hesitate to push the button.”

No surprise, then, that companies are building caution into their products. Workplace benefits fintech company Candidly requires user permission before financial events automatically occur. 

Laurel Taylor, founder and CEO of Candidly, told us: “Whether it's investing, whether it's fractional investing, whether it's opening an account or completing a transaction, the automation of that experience is already here in some areas of the financial services experience, but ultimately, I'm not comfortable with agents taking that final action without the user saying, ‘yep, I'm ready to do it, complete the transaction for me.’”

Some of the hesitation about outsourcing certain tasks is more about mindfulness on discretionary spend than anything else. Alloy Lab’s Henrichs told us he refuses to autopay his credit cards, for instance. “I insist on looking at the statement and being upset at how much my wife DoorDashes,” Henrichs said.

Theodora Lau, the founder of Unconventional Ventures, doesn’t like autopaying her credit cards either, so she can review her statement manually. “To do that is extra friction,” said Lau. “It’s weird, but I think that friction keeps me on track. Because otherwise when everything is automated, you tap at a retail store and pay. Or, you have subscriptions you sign up for and you don't even think and blink. And then, when you have all of your bulk of purchases being on auto pay, and something coming out from your account automatically, you don't have that moment to pause and check what you have done.”

For others, it’s about control. Ben Maxim, chief technology officer at Michigan State Federal Credit Union and chief operating officer of the Reseda Group, wants to take the blame when things go wrong with an investment rather than outsource the decision to a robo advisor.

“Sure, they probably know better than me, but I also egotistically think that I know best,” Maxim said. “But also, if the robot gets it wrong, or even a wealth advisor of any kind gets it wrong, I don't want to be mad at someone else. I'd rather be mad at myself because I would just blame the tool. There will be so much blame to be like, ‘Well, why didn't you make me rich? You said you'd make me rich. Well, okay, cool.’ So I think that's one that I won't turn over.” 

Even some of the automation enthusiasts keep one pause in their pocket depending on the dollar amount.

Shamir Karkal, president of Aleph Invariance and co-founder of Simple, said he would automate almost everything except the irrevocable sending of large amounts of money. 

“So, when we do wire transfers, it's mostly a business problem, not a personal issue,” Karkal said. “I would like to have at least one and ideally two humans sign off on it before it gets sent.” 

Consumers are drawing their own lines. In a survey of roughly 8,000 consumers across seven countries, Global Payments, a payment technology and software company, found 82 percent of consumers said they would let an AI agent spend up to $50 on movie tickets, up from 32 percent a year earlier. That comfort drops as the price tag moves up and the purchase changes. At up to $100, 69 percent said they would let an agent buy groceries and everyday essentials and 58 percent said they would let one buy electronics and gadgets. 

Still, there are limits to adoption. Half of respondents worried about the security of their payment details, 42 percent worried the agent would make a wrong decision and roughly a third wanted to approve every transaction before a payment is made. 

A bad movie ticket won't gut anyone's finances. At $50, saving time and finding better deals is worth the risk. For smaller purchases, the pause is already winding down for plenty of people.

Price isn’t the only factor, however. Some purchases are fun. I would let an agent restock my razor blades but I am not letting one auto-buy my dress. I love flipping through different looks. Someone else might feel that way about baseball cards. 

So the pause isn’t disappearing. It’s moving up the price tag and into purchases people like making. For banks and fintech companies, those are the areas that will resist automation the longest. 

Editor’s note: Attending Money20/20 and want to record a Yours in Finance interview? Send us a note!