WHERE ARE WE HEADED WITH CROSS BORDER PAYMENTS TRANSPARENCY? - Finance news and analysis from Global Banking & Finance Review
Finance

WHERE ARE WE HEADED WITH CROSS BORDER PAYMENTS TRANSPARENCY?

Published by Gbaf News

Posted on April 5, 2014

3 min read

· Last updated: April 9, 2014

Add as preferred source on Google

By Neil Burton, Director of Product Service Strategy at Earthport.

The Uncertainty of Cross-Border Payments

Moving money internationally is sometimes considered an uncertain business. Senders rarely know what the total transaction costs are, or when funds will arrive. Beneficiaries may not know what the received funds are for, leaving them with significant administrative and financial costs in reconciling receivables with deliverables. More often than not, it isn’t that banks don’t want to share the information, but rather that the information itself isn’t visible across the multiple transactions it takes to make one simple cross-border payment. 

US Regulatory Efforts to Increase Transparency

To address these issues, for retail senders at least, the US policy makers are enforcing transparency through Section 1073 of the Dodd-Frank Act.  The regulation requires banks providing cross-border payments services to US consumers to commit upfront to all fees, the delivery date of funds and more. It came into force in October 2013.

Transparency is the future

Where Are We Headed With Cross Border Payments Transparency?

Where Are We Headed With Cross Border Payments Transparency?

Why Transparency Matters for Users

Lack of transparency inhibits choice. Consumers and corporates informed of transaction costs, delivery dates, and so forth are best placed to choose the right service for the type of cross-border payment they are making.

Challenges Facing Beneficiaries of Payments

For beneficiaries, especially businesses, there are still major challenges. Getting paid is good, naturally, but it’s not as good as you might think; if you don’t know what you’ve been paid for, and by whom (which might happen if a payment is an aggregated amount made on behalf of multiple subsidiaries). There’s still a lot of work to do.

Is there a solution?

It’s simple enough to visualise a solution when considering two parties to a single transaction; but it’s harder when multiple senders and beneficiaries are involved.

The ideal system needs to work for all parties. In a networked industry, this is most likely to be achieved through operational transparency where the network is merely a conduit for information, not a filter, creator or barrier.

Neil Burton

Neil Burton

Building a Transparent and Ubiquitous System

The solution must also be ubiquitous. Nationally, domestic payments schemes usually have good predictability and reach, and initiatives such as the IPFA are helping to interlink them by setting standards, but most ACHs provide only a component of a payment (the clearing). A truly ubiquitous service requires more. This is the domain of the regulated payments services providers, who provide settlement to banked beneficiaries across many countries. IPFA’s members today provide predictable services to more than half the world’s banked population. Services including fixed end-to-end fees per transaction – the FX rate are fixed on send, and there is 100% predictability on all fees (other than taxes) and 100% predictability value date.

The opportunity – and the challenge – therefore exists for a transparent global payments scheme that has the provision to carry the context along with the transaction. In an era where this is the ultimate goal, transparent payments services will come to be seen as an area of collaboration between banks and regulated non-banks.

Key Takeaways

  • Section 1073 of Dodd‑Frank (effective October 2013) mandates transparency in fees, delivery dates, and FX rates for US cross‑border payments for consumers.
  • Lack of visibility across multi‑step payments networks still frustrates both senders and beneficiaries.
  • Earthport and IPFA aim to create a seamless, predictable global payments infrastructure through standardized messaging and end‑to‑end transparency.
  • The goal is operational transparency—networks acting as conduits, not information filters—and ubiquity across jurisdictions.

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Section 1073 of the Dodd‑Frank Act?
It’s a regulation that took effect in October 2013 requiring US cross‑border payment providers to disclose total fees, FX rates, and delivery dates upfront to consumers.
Why is cross‑border payment transparency still problematic?
Because information gets lost across multiple intermediaries, making it hard for senders to know total cost and for beneficiaries to know payment purpose or origin.
How do Earthport and IPFA contribute to transparency?
Earthport integrates domestic ACH networks globally, offering fixed fees, FX rates, and delivery predictability; IPFA defines standards that interlink these schemes for interoperability.
What is ‘operational transparency’?
A model where payment networks act as transparent conduits carrying full transaction context without filtering or obscuring information.

Tags

Related Articles

More from Finance

Explore more articles in the Finance category