Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES The Company's commitments as of June 30, 2016 did not materially change from the amounts set forth in the Company's 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Legal Matters and Other Contingencies From time to time, the Company is party to various legal proceedings incident to the operation of its business. For example, the Company is currently involved in proceedings brought by stockholders, former employees and merchants, intellectual property infringement suits and suits by customers (individually or as class actions) alleging, among other things, violations of the federal securities laws, the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act and state laws governing gift cards, stored value cards and coupons. The following is a brief description of significant legal proceedings. The Company was a defendant in a proceeding pursuant to which, on October 29, 2012, a consolidated amended class action complaint was filed against the Company, certain of its directors and officers, and the underwriters that participated in the initial public offering of the Company's Class A common stock. The case was pending before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois: In re Groupon, Inc. Securities Litigation. In the first quarter of 2016, the parties entered into a term sheet to settle the litigation that provides for a settlement payment to the class of $45.0 million in cash, including plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees, in exchange for a full and final release and also includes a denial of liability or any wrongdoing by the Company and the other defendants. On April 7, 2016, the Court entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. On April 21, 2016, a $45.0 million settlement payment was made into an escrow account. On July 13, 2016, the Court entered an order providing final approval of the settlement and final judgment, dismissing the action with prejudice. The Company was fully reserved for the settlement amount as of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015. In addition, federal and state purported stockholder derivative lawsuits have been filed against certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers. The federal purported stockholder derivative lawsuit was originally filed in April 2012, and a consolidated stockholder derivative complaint, filed on July 30, 2012, is currently pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois: In re Groupon Derivative Litigation. The state derivative cases are currently pending before the Chancery Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois: Orrego v. Lefkofsky, et al., was filed on April 5, 2012; and Kim v. Lefkofsky, et al., was filed on May 25, 2012. In the first quarter of 2016, the parties reached an agreement in principle to settle the litigation. The agreement, which is subject to court approval, provides that the Company will implement certain corporate reforms. On June 22, 2016, the court entered an order for the parties to finalize settlement documentation related to the corporate reforms by August 3, 2016, for Plaintiffs to file their motion for preliminary approval by August 17, 2016, and setting the hearing on the motion for preliminary approval for August 31, 2016. The parties have not reached agreement on a reasonable plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fee award to be paid as part of the settlement, and continue to negotiate that aspect of the settlement. In 2010, the Company was named as a defendant in a series of class actions were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The consolidated actions are referred to as In re Groupon Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation. In July 2015, the parties reached an agreement in principle regarding a settlement involving a combination of cash and Groupon credits, worth a total of $8.5 million. On March 23, 2016, the district court granted final approval of the settlement over various objections posed by two individuals and entered judgment pursuant to the settlement. In April 2016, the two individuals who had objected filed notices of appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. One appeal challenged the district court’s approval of the class action settlement; the other appeal challenged the district court’s denial of the objector’s request for an award of attorney’s fees. The appeal challenging the approval of the settlement was dismissed on June 23, 2016, and the settlement became final and non-appealable as of that date. The case was dismissed with prejudice and settlement claims are being validated and processed. The Company was fully reserved for the settlement amount as of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015. On March 2, 2016, International Business Machines Corporation ("IBM") filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against the Company. In the complaint, IBM alleges that the Company has infringed and continues to willfully infringe certain IBM patents that IBM claims relate to the presentation of applications and advertising in an interactive service, preserving state information in online transactions and single sign-on processes in a computing environment and seeks unspecified damages (including a request that the amount of compensatory damages be trebled), injunctive relief and costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. On May 9, 2016, the Company filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against IBM. The Company alleges that IBM has infringed and continues to willfully infringe one of the Company’s patents relating to location-based services. The Company intends to seek damages and injunctive relief for IBM’s infringement of this patent. Further, the Company plans to vigorously defend against the claims filed by IBM. In addition, other third parties have from time to time claimed, and others may claim in the future, that the Company has infringed their intellectual property rights. The Company is subject to intellectual property disputes, including patent infringement claims, and expects that it will increasingly be subject to intellectual property infringement claims as its services expand in scope and complexity. The Company has in the past litigated such claims, and the Company is presently involved in several patent infringement and other intellectual property-related claims, including pending litigation, some of which could involve potentially substantial claims for damages. The Company may also become more vulnerable to third party claims as laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act are interpreted by the courts, and as the Company becomes subject to laws in jurisdictions where the underlying laws with respect to the potential liability of online intermediaries are either unclear or less favorable. The Company believes that additional lawsuits alleging that it has violated patent, copyright or trademark laws will be filed against it. Intellectual property claims, whether meritorious or not, are time consuming and costly to resolve, could require expensive changes in the Company's methods of doing business, or could require it to enter into costly royalty or licensing agreements. The Company is also subject to, or in the future may become subject to, a variety of regulatory inquiries across the jurisdictions where the Company conducts its business, including, for example, inquiries related to consumer protection, employment matters and/or hiring practices, marketing practices, tax, unclaimed property and privacy rules and regulations. Any regulatory actions against the Company, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming, result in costly litigation, damage awards, injunctive relief or increased costs of doing business through adverse judgment or settlement, require the Company to change its business practices in expensive ways, require significant amounts of management time, result in the diversion of significant operational resources or otherwise harm the Company's business. The Company establishes an accrued liability for loss contingencies related to legal and regulatory matters when the loss is both probable and estimable. These accruals represent management's best estimate of probable losses and, in such cases, there may be an exposure to loss in excess of the amounts accrued. For certain of the matters described above, there are inherent and significant uncertainties based on, among other factors, the stage of the proceedings, developments in the applicable facts of law, or the lack of a specific damage claim. However, the Company believes that the amount of reasonably possible losses in excess of the amounts accrued for these matters would not have a material adverse effect on its business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The Company's accrued liabilities for loss contingencies related to legal and regulatory matters may change in the future as a result of new developments, including, but not limited to, the occurrence of new legal matters, changes in the law or regulatory environment, adverse or favorable rulings, newly discovered facts relevant to the matter, or changes in the strategy for the matter. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors. Indemnifications In the normal course of business to facilitate transactions related to its operations, the Company indemnifies certain parties, including employees, lessors, service providers and merchants, with respect to various matters. The Company has agreed to hold certain parties harmless against losses arising from a breach of representations or covenants, or other claims made against those parties. These agreements may limit the time within which an indemnification claim can be made and the amount of the claim. The Company is also subject to increased exposure to various claims as a result of its acquisitions, particularly in cases where the Company is entering into new businesses in connection with such acquisitions. The Company may also become more vulnerable to claims as it expands the range and scope of its services and is subject to laws in jurisdictions where the underlying laws with respect to potential liability are either unclear or less favorable. In addition, the Company has entered into indemnification agreements with its officers, directors and underwriters, and the Company's bylaws contain similar indemnification obligations that cover officers, directors, employee and other agents. It is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount under these indemnification agreements due to the limited history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Historically, any payments that the Company has made under these agreements have not had a material impact on the operating results, financial position or cash flows of the Company.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

The Company's commitments as of June 30, 2016 did not materially change from the amounts set forth in the Company's 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Legal Matters and Other Contingencies

From time to time, the Company is party to various legal proceedings incident to the operation of its business. For example, the Company is currently involved in proceedings brought by stockholders, former employees and merchants, intellectual property infringement suits and suits by customers (individually or as class actions) alleging, among other things, violations of the federal securities laws, the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act and state laws governing gift cards, stored value cards and coupons. The following is a brief description of significant legal proceedings.

The Company was a defendant in a proceeding pursuant to which, on October 29, 2012, a consolidated amended class action complaint was filed against the Company, certain of its directors and officers, and the underwriters that participated in the initial public offering of the Company's Class A common stock. The case was pending before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois: In re Groupon, Inc. Securities Litigation. In the first quarter of 2016, the parties entered into a term sheet to settle the litigation that provides for a settlement payment to the class of $45.0 million in cash, including plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees, in exchange for a full and final release and also includes a denial of liability or any wrongdoing by the Company and the other defendants. On April 7, 2016, the Court entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. On April 21, 2016, a $45.0 million settlement payment was made into an escrow account. On July 13, 2016, the Court entered an order providing final approval of the settlement and final judgment, dismissing the action with prejudice. The Company was fully reserved for the settlement amount as of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

In addition, federal and state purported stockholder derivative lawsuits have been filed against certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers. The federal purported stockholder derivative lawsuit was originally filed in April 2012, and a consolidated stockholder derivative complaint, filed on July 30, 2012, is currently pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois: In re Groupon Derivative Litigation. The state derivative cases are currently pending before the Chancery Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois: Orrego v. Lefkofsky, et al., was filed on April 5, 2012; and Kim v. Lefkofsky, et al., was filed on May 25, 2012. In the first quarter of 2016, the parties reached an agreement in principle to settle the litigation. The agreement, which is subject to court approval, provides that the Company will implement certain corporate reforms. On June 22, 2016, the court entered an order for the parties to finalize settlement documentation related to the corporate reforms by August 3, 2016, for Plaintiffs to file their motion for preliminary approval by August 17, 2016, and setting the hearing on the motion for preliminary approval for August 31, 2016. The parties have not reached agreement on a reasonable plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fee award to be paid as part of the settlement, and continue to negotiate that aspect of the settlement.

In 2010, the Company was named as a defendant in a series of class actions were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The consolidated actions are referred to as In re Groupon Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation. In July 2015, the parties reached an agreement in principle regarding a settlement involving a combination of cash and Groupon credits, worth a total of $8.5 million. On March 23, 2016, the district court granted final approval of the settlement over various objections posed by two individuals and entered judgment pursuant to the settlement. In April 2016, the two individuals who had objected filed notices of appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. One appeal challenged the district court’s approval of the class action settlement; the other appeal challenged the district court’s denial of the objector’s request for an award of attorney’s fees. The appeal challenging the approval of the settlement was dismissed on June 23, 2016, and the settlement became final and non-appealable as of that date. The case was dismissed with prejudice and settlement claims are being validated and processed. The Company was fully reserved for the settlement amount as of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

On March 2, 2016, International Business Machines Corporation ("IBM") filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against the Company. In the complaint, IBM alleges that the Company has infringed and continues to willfully infringe certain IBM patents that IBM claims relate to the presentation of applications and advertising in an interactive service, preserving state information in online transactions and single sign-on processes in a computing environment and seeks unspecified damages (including a request that the amount of compensatory damages be trebled), injunctive relief and costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. On May 9, 2016, the Company filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against IBM. The Company alleges that IBM has infringed and continues to willfully infringe one of the Company’s patents relating to location-based services. The Company intends to seek damages and injunctive relief for IBM’s infringement of this patent. Further, the Company plans to vigorously defend against the claims filed by IBM.

In addition, other third parties have from time to time claimed, and others may claim in the future, that the Company has infringed their intellectual property rights. The Company is subject to intellectual property disputes, including patent infringement claims, and expects that it will increasingly be subject to intellectual property infringement claims as its services expand in scope and complexity. The Company has in the past litigated such claims, and the Company is presently involved in several patent infringement and other intellectual property-related claims, including pending litigation, some of which could involve potentially substantial claims for damages. The Company may also become more vulnerable to third party claims as laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act are interpreted by the courts, and as the Company becomes subject to laws in jurisdictions where the underlying laws with respect to the potential liability of online intermediaries are either unclear or less favorable. The Company believes that additional lawsuits alleging that it has violated patent, copyright or trademark laws will be filed against it. Intellectual property claims, whether meritorious or not, are time consuming and costly to resolve, could require expensive changes in the Company's methods of doing business, or could require it to enter into costly royalty or licensing agreements.

The Company is also subject to, or in the future may become subject to, a variety of regulatory inquiries across the jurisdictions where the Company conducts its business, including, for example, inquiries related to consumer protection, employment matters and/or hiring practices, marketing practices, tax, unclaimed property and privacy rules and regulations. Any regulatory actions against the Company, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming, result in costly litigation, damage awards, injunctive relief or increased costs of doing business through adverse judgment or settlement, require the Company to change its business practices in expensive ways, require significant amounts of management time, result in the diversion of significant operational resources or otherwise harm the Company's business.

The Company establishes an accrued liability for loss contingencies related to legal and regulatory matters when the loss is both probable and estimable. These accruals represent management's best estimate of probable losses and, in such cases, there may be an exposure to loss in excess of the amounts accrued. For certain of the matters described above, there are inherent and significant uncertainties based on, among other factors, the stage of the proceedings, developments in the applicable facts of law, or the lack of a specific damage claim. However, the Company believes that the amount of reasonably possible losses in excess of the amounts accrued for these matters would not have a material adverse effect on its business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The Company's accrued liabilities for loss contingencies related to legal and regulatory matters may change in the future as a result of new developments, including, but not limited to, the occurrence of new legal matters, changes in the law or regulatory environment, adverse or favorable rulings, newly discovered facts relevant to the matter, or changes in the strategy for the matter. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.

Indemnifications

In the normal course of business to facilitate transactions related to its operations, the Company indemnifies certain parties, including employees, lessors, service providers and merchants, with respect to various matters. The Company has agreed to hold certain parties harmless against losses arising from a breach of representations or covenants, or other claims made against those parties. These agreements may limit the time within which an indemnification claim can be made and the amount of the claim. The Company is also subject to increased exposure to various claims as a result of its acquisitions, particularly in cases where the Company is entering into new businesses in connection with such acquisitions. The Company may also become more vulnerable to claims as it expands the range and scope of its services and is subject to laws in jurisdictions where the underlying laws with respect to potential liability are either unclear or less favorable. In addition, the Company has entered into indemnification agreements with its officers, directors and underwriters, and the Company's bylaws contain similar indemnification obligations that cover officers, directors, employee and other agents.

It is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount under these indemnification agreements due to the limited history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Historically, any payments that the Company has made under these agreements have not had a material impact on the operating results, financial position or cash flows of the Company.