UCP for B2B
UCP has no B2B spec, and B2B is not an officially named vertical. It is the most debated one.
Simple B2B works today: a small business buying through a store with a card follows the same flow as a consumer. Net-30/60/90 terms, deposits and instalments also became expressible in v2026-08-25 through shared payment terms.
Procurement is what is missing: approval workflows, purchase orders and cost centres, requests for quotes, and customer-specific catalogues and pricing.
-
11 Jan 2026UCP announced (consumer retail)
-
25 Aug 2026Payment terms ship in common/
-
Not yetA B2B namespace
01What B2B needs from UCP
One item on this list has shipped. The rest have no UCP primitive yet.
| Area | Status | What it says |
|---|---|---|
| Net payment terms | released | Payment terms with schedules and due dates shipped in v2026-08-25 as dev.ucp.common.payment.terms, so net-30/60/90, deposits and instalments are expressible at checkout. They are not linked to purchase orders or approvals. |
| Approval workflows | not yet | Manager and finance approval before a purchase commits. There is no UCP primitive for it. |
| Purchase orders and cost centres | not yet | PO numbers, cost-centre coding and internal references for accounts payable. UCP carries none of this today. |
| Requests for quotes | not yet | The B2B path is quote, negotiated price, PO, fulfilment. UCP's flow is search, cart, checkout. |
| Customer-specific catalogues and pricing | not yet | Each buyer sees negotiated products and prices. A UCP catalogue is the same for everyone at a store. |
| Account hierarchies, minimum orders, tax exemption | not yet | Parent and subsidiary accounts, minimum order quantities, tax-exempt buying and procurement punchout are all outside the spec. |
02Background
UCP is a consumer-retail protocol. That single fact decides most of the B2B argument — and it's the part both sides of the debate keep talking past. Simple B2B — a small business buying through a store on a card, same as a consumer — works on today's UCP capabilities.
Complex B2B — multi-step approval, purchase orders, RFQs, customer-specific catalogs and negotiated contract pricing — requires primitives that simply aren't in the spec yet. (One item recently came off that list: negotiated payment terms with schedules shipped in the v2026-08-25 release as dev.ucp.common.payment.terms, so net-30/60/90, deposits and instalments are now expressible at checkout — more below.) The bullish posts (Aton, Cloudfy, Presta, Gotoclient, Reveation Labs) are right about the first half; the skeptical voices (Striped Giraffe, Lance Owide) are right about most of the second — though the payment-terms gap they pointed to has since started to close. This page splits the difference honestly.
What it would look likeAn ops manager tells an agent: "re-order the office supplies we usually buy, hold anything over $500 for approval, charge cost center 12-7, use our usual Net-30 terms." Today's UCP can handle the re-order against a card on file, and — since negotiated payment terms shipped in v2026-08-25 — the Net-30 itself is now expressible. The approval workflow and the cost center are the primitives still missing.
03What to do now
Cover the SMB path now
Small-business B2B buying through a card on a retail-like store works on today's UCP. Be discoverable and conformant — that path is real.
Surface what B2B signals you can
Bulk pricing tiers, MOQs and customer-specific availability don't have UCP fields yet — but a clean, machine-readable catalog gets you ahead when they do.
Track the spec for a dev.ucp.b2b.* namespace
If a B2B namespace lands, the heavier flows (PO, approvals, RFQ, contract pricing) become possible. We'll surface it the moment it ships.
04What we'll measure
05Voices in the debate
06FAQ
Is B2B an official UCP vertical?
No. Google has named lodging, travel and local food delivery as UCP verticals. B2B has not been formally scoped by the Technical Council or named as a vertical by Google. The community is debating it; the spec is not addressing it directly yet.
Can I use UCP for B2B ecommerce today?
For SMB B2B — small businesses buying through a store on a card — yes, the same UCP capabilities that serve consumer retail work. For complex B2B — multi-step approvals, purchase orders, RFQs, contract pricing — mostly no, those primitives are not in the published spec. The one recent exception is net payment terms: negotiated terms with schedules shipped in v2026-08-25, so net-30/60/90 is now expressible.
What B2B features is UCP missing?
The shortlist: multi-step buyer approval, PO numbers and cost centers, RFQ/quote workflow, tiered and contract pricing, customer-specific catalogs and pricing, account hierarchies, MOQs, tax-exempt purchasing, and procurement-system punchout (Coupa, Ariba). One item recently came off this list — negotiated payment terms (net-30/60/90, plus deposits and instalments) shipped in v2026-08-25 as dev.ucp.common.payment.terms (#603, #692).
Will UCP add B2B-specific capabilities?
Undecided. The multi-vertical restructure is no longer a proposal: the v2026-08-25 release shipped it, moving the payment constructs out of shopping/ and into the cross-vertical common/ group, and making them vertical-agnostic. That creates the structural space for a dev.ucp.b2b.* namespace — but the release named Food and Lodging as the verticals it is preparing for, not B2B, and no B2B charter has been opened. There is no announced timeline.
How does UCP for B2B compare with ACP?
Both UCP and ACP were designed for consumer retail flows; both face the same B2B gap. Neither publishes B2B-specific primitives today, so the practical answer for buyers is the same: SMB B2B is workable on either; complex enterprise B2B isn't.
07Keep reading
Other UCP verticals
UCP for Retail
LiveThe first and largest UCP vertical — agents search catalogs, build carts, and check out across thousands of verified stores.
19,081 verified merchantsUCP for Lodging
Draft capability merged · not yet releasedUCP's first lodging capability, dev.ucp.lodging.booking, is merged into the spec as a draft. It isn't in a release yet. Here's what it covers and what it still has to handle.
UCP for Travel
AnnouncedFlights, rail and travel distribution are agentic commerce's hardest vertical — perishable inventory and dynamically generated offers, not fixed SKUs.
UCP for Food Ordering
Technical Council formed · spec in progressUCP has a seated Food Technical Council and a phased roadmap that starts at checkout, not the menu — but no food namespace and no published schema. Here's what it still has to handle.
UCP for Services
Community-proposed · no official UCP services spec yetAppointments, classes, reservations and rentals sell time, not stock. UCP has no services namespace yet — but a Governing Council working group is being explored, and scheduling capabilities are already turning up in real UCP profiles.
Explore protocol data
Is your store agent-ready?
Whichever vertical you're in, the prerequisite is the same: a valid, machine-readable UCP endpoint an agent can actually transact against.
Get the agentic commerce digest every Monday
Real adoption data, ecosystem trends, new spec versions, and the stores that broke or recovered this week. Read by founders and engineers building the next generation of commerce.