May 29, 2026REG-0152Right

Wireless Power Consortium certifies Galaxy S26+ for Qi

WPC Qi-ID 26854 names Galaxy S26+, manufacturer part number SC-52G, power profile BPP, maximum load power 5.0 W, certification…

A Wireless Power Consortium filing lists a Galaxy S26+ model, part number SC-52G, certified for 5.0W Qi wireless charging on May 29, 2026.

How to read this record

What was reportedWPC Qi-ID 26854 names Galaxy S26+, manufacturer part number SC-52G, power profile BPP, maximum load power 5.0 W, certification…
Who said it, and whenIt was reported on May 29, 2026 in Wireless Power Consortium, and we could not tell who reported it first.
What happened, and whenSamsung Galaxy S26 was announced on Feb 25, 2026. From our product record · source
The verdict, and whyRightIt turned out the way this report said.Why: The Wireless Power Consortium record itself matches the claimed product name, part number and Qi certification details. What the company published

What do these words mean?

Right: It turned out the way this report said.
Partly right: Some of this was right and some of it was not.
Wrong: It did not turn out this way.
Moving target: This was right about the plan at the time. The company then changed it.
Never settled: The company has announced the product and nobody ever confirmed or denied this.
Not comparable: This measured a different thing from the number the company published, so the two cannot be compared.
No outcome yet: Nothing has happened yet that would prove this right or wrong.
Not checked yet: The company has answered this. We have not finished checking this one.
Checked: Checked means the company has since given an answer and we compared it with what was reported. Details still waiting on an answer, details nothing can settle, details where the plan itself changed, and details we have not finished reviewing are all counted separately and are not part of that number.
Moving target: A moving target is a report that described the plan accurately at the time, on a product the company then changed. We count these on their own: it would flatter a reporter to call them right, and it would blame a reporter for a decision that was not theirs to call them wrong.