• Despre noi
  • Contact
  • Register

  • Facebook
  • RSS
NOCASH ® de 16 ani
blue1logobanner700x80png
  • Carduri
  • NFC & Contactless
  • Plati mobile
  • e-Commerce
  • e-Administratie
  • e-Money
  • terminale
  • Aplicatii

Date: 21.04.2018

  • Intern
  • Rapoarte
  • Nocash TV
  • legislatie
  • Blog
  • Events
  • CYBERSECURITY
  • Extern

You are here:

  • Home
  • Blog
  • PSD2: access to bank services for payment institutions – levelling the playing field?

PSD2: access to bank services for payment institutions – levelling the playing field?

21 April, 2017

By: admin

category: Blog, legislatie

556 0

Tudor Nistor profil blogFor payment institutions (PIs), access to a payment account maintained by a credit institution is vital for the operation of their business. PIs need to be able to open and maintain bank accounts in order to provide payment services.

The PI’s bank account access is required to take receipt of payments, to have access to ATM’s network, to receive deposits from agents, hold safeguarded client funds and process payments including refunds.

In the past years the PIs have encountered many obstacles in opening and maintaining bank accounts – banks having a decisive role regarding the access to essential financial infrastructure (e.g access to settlement accounts, safeguarding of clients’ funds, indirect access to Payment Systems and currency settlements).

The current (legal) system effectively allowed banks to limit competition (especially for money remittance providers) by deciding which PI should be able to exist and which should not.

Some of the reasons identified: AML/CFT reasons / or no justification given / or PIs were simply told by some banks that they just do not serve payment institutions.

What after PSD2? Will the game change?

A new Article 36 of PSD2 requires Member States to ensure that: “payment institutions have access to credit institutions’ payment accounts services on an objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate basis. Such access shall be sufficiently extensive as to allow payment institutions to provide payment services in an unhindered and efficient manner.”

In addition, “the credit institution shall provide the competent authority with duly motivated reasons for any rejection.”

Recital 39 gives additional explanation stating that when engaging in the provision of one or more of the payment services covered by PSD2, payment service providers “should always hold payment accounts used exclusively for payment transactions” and “in order to enable payment service providers to provide payment services, it is indispensable that they have the possibility to open and maintain accounts with credit institutions”. The Member States “should ensure that access to such accounts be provided in a manner that is not discriminatory and that is proportionate to the legitimate aim it intends to serve. While access can be basic, it should always be sufficiently extensive for the payment institution to be able to provide its services in an unobstructed and efficient way”.

Implementation?!

Further clarification of this article from the competent authorities is necessary to ensure this issue is being addressed adequately.

For example, for what reasons a credit institution may chose not to open (or close) a bank account for a payment institution?

It is understandable that any risk of money laundering may give objective reasons to the credit institutions to do that (FATF report identified PIs as a high risk activity from the AML/CTF perspective). But how? I would say, only in accordance with the provisions of anti money laundering laws. The risk assessments should be undertaken by credit institutions on an individual customer basis rather than, as appears to be happening now in some EU member states, on a sectoral basis.

However, credit institutions that decline a payment institution with access to a payment account will have to explain the rejection to the competent authority – based on dully motivated reasons.

Tudor Nistor – payment services lawyer, specialised on payments and e-money regulatory matters


Tags: PSD2 implementation, Tudor Nistor - payments & fintech lawyer

B

Rating

  • 556views
  • 0comments

Subscribe

Subscribe to comments

recommend to friends

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked. *

Name*

E-mail*

Website

Comment

Cancel reply

Current day month ye@r *

Leave this field empty *

Newsletter Sign Up Form

ABONARE NEWSLETTER

Fii la curent cu ultimele stiri din industria platilor fara numerar, locale si internationale!

Sondaj de opinie

Plata facturilor
Cum va platiti utilitatile?(apa, gaze, lumina, telecom)
View Results
Total Answers 1379
Total Votes 1379
View Poll Archive

Postari Media

  • TypingDNA la Gala NOCASH newsiteCompetitorii Fintech la Gala NOCASH: TypingDNA - "autentificarea utilizatorului dupa modul in care tasteaza"
  • Telegram Group blockchain newsiteAn encripted messaging app seeking to create its own cryptocurrency raises $1.7 Billion in Initial Coin Offering - the world’s largest
  • Ebriza newsiteGrupul Banca Transilvania investeste intr-un start-up care a dezvoltat un soft ce functioneaza ca o casa de marcat virtuala
  • BBVA facial recognition newsiteBBVA launches its ‘invisible payments’ strategy
  • TypingDNA newsiteUn startup-romanesc a creat o solutie online de autentificare bazata pe modul in care tasteaza utilizatorii

Citeste mai mult

Cifre strategice & Declaratii tendinta

  • rubrica cifre&declaratii newsiteCifre strategice & Declaratii tendinta

Citeste mai mult

Archives