Why should everyone be bothered by Gmail’s latest storage change?

Google is testing an interesting change in Gmail. New users found they were limited to only 5GB of cloud storage, but had to add their phone number to their Gmail account to unlock the full 15GB.

Google confirmed this test Android AuthoritySaying that this applied to new users in certain regions and was supposed to help provide a “higher quality storage experience.” It also claimed that the move has encouraged users to protect their accounts and improved data recovery. Still, there’s something really suspicious about effectively hanging on to an existing cloud storage cap in exchange for a phone number.

There are some good reasons why a cloud service provider would do something like this. As Google implies, adding a phone number to your Gmail account is one way to recover your account. However, there are other recovery options, such as adding a second email address or recovery contact.

The company also suggests that adding a number will help users protect their account. However, Google prompts, passkeys, and other authentication methods are more secure than text messages. After all, text-based authentication is vulnerable to SIM swap attacks, phishing, and other attack methods.

I also imagine that Google wants to make life harder for spammers and scammers. These bad actors can create multiple accounts without a phone number. However, some regions require a phone number first to create a Gmail account. I’m also guessing that many cyber criminals have burner phone numbers through various VoIP platforms. Additionally, the 5GB limit may not be a problem for cybercriminals at first, as they may not plan on using these accounts for long.

Google’s claim that this is a test suggests that this may not be a permanent situation. Still, this move doesn’t sit well with me. Even if the company has good intentions, holding two-thirds of a new user’s cloud storage cap hostage seems extremely suspicious. I’m more open to Google requiring a phone number to open a Gmail account in the first place. However, the 5GB limit is designed to attract people and then eventually make them restless enough to share their phone number. And this 5GB cap apparently affects Google Drive too, with colleague Rob Triggs pointing out that it could seriously impact WhatsApp backups.

The company could offer more cloud storage in exchange for your phone number. In fact, it had done similar things in previous years when it offered 2GB of additional cloud storage for users who passed security checks. But I think the extra storage is worth the money, especially in 2026.

It’s also worth noting that this 5GB Gmail cap is in line with the free iCloud Mail tier, but Apple doesn’t insert ads into its email platform. Meanwhile, Outlook offers 15 GB of free storage, while Yahoo Mail offers 15 GB or 20 GB depending on the region.

This seems like yet more evidence of big tech luring people with free services and then forcing them to hand over cash or (in this case) personal information. This wouldn’t be the first time Google has taken this type of approach. After all, Google Photos offered free media uploads for years, until the company switched to a 15GB cap in 2021. This also comes as Google has been gradually diminishing the free YouTube viewing experience to drive people towards YouTube Premium. So you can understand why I’m skeptical of the company’s Gmail claims.

One saving grace is that this Gmail trial does not apply to existing users who are below the 5GB limit. However, this may be annoying for those same users who want to open an alternate email account, but Google apparently allows up to four accounts linked to the same phone number.

The phone number requirement also comes as the US government cracks down on dissent, while ICE detains and deports immigrants and citizens alike. So do you really want to give even more personal information to American companies in the first place?

In any case, I hope the Gmail phone number glitch continues to be a test. Google may have some sensible reasons for wanting this 5GB cap, but it’s hard not to see it against the backdrop of past actions against free users.