• Payments Canada is leading the adoption of ISO 20022 in Canada, to help institutions transition ahead of the November 2025 deadline.
• Key updates include a hybrid address format and a shift from legacy MT messages to XML-based MX messages.

Have you ever looked at your bank statement and seen a payment you don’t recognise? If so, you’re not alone. Traditional electronic payments often only include basic information, like the amount and date, leaving little insight into the payment itself. This lack of detail creates friction for everyone, from individuals managing personal finances to businesses trying to reconcile payments with invoices. 

Enter ISO 20022, the global financial messaging standard that’s set to transform the way we pay by providing richer, more structured data with every transaction. By embedding detailed remittance information, ISO 20022 makes payments more transparent, efficient and useful, not just for financial institutions but for businesses of all sizes and their customers. 

Payments Canada, the organisation which operates Canada’s national payment systems, leads the country’s adoption of ISO 20022 by offering resources, education, training and operational support for Canada’s financial ecosystem. They also manage ISO 20022 usage guidelines for our payment systems in alignment with global standards.

Payments Canada has published updated ISO 20022 message specifications for use on Lynx, Canada’s high-value payment system. These specifications were published alongside a companion document to help financial institutions prepare for changes coming in November 2025. These revised guidelines introduce enhancements, including a new hybrid postal address format developed by Swift’s Payment Market Practice Group (PMPG). 

This hybrid approach combines structured address elements, such as country and town name, with unstructured fields like address lines. It’s a practical bridge that enables organisations to start transitioning toward structured data without requiring an immediate change. Structured address formats will improve accuracy, reduce errors and support critical processes like anti-money laundering (AML) monitoring. 

Another important update is the global shift from legacy MT messages to the modern MX format, which uses XML-based messaging. As of November 2025, the coexistence period of these two message types will end, meaning some MT messages will no longer be supported. Financial institutions, payment service providers and their technology partners are strongly encouraged to prepare for this transition by updating their systems and reviewing how the changes may impact their operations. 

Amidst these transformational shifts in the way we move money, ISO 20022 will embed actionable data into every transaction. As more countries align with global standards, as Canada is well on the way to doing, payments and processes will only grow more swift, fast, and secure.

—

To learn more about ISO 20022 and how Payments Canada supports its adoption, visit their website and explore their growing library of educational materials. 

You can also join over 1,900 payment leaders and innovators at The Payments Canada SUMMIT, happening 6-8 May in Toronto. Use promo code SUMM25PCVIP to save $100 off your event pass. 

The post Enhancing the way we pay: Canada’s migration to ISO 20022, and its numerous benefits appeared first on Trade Finance Global.

A massive electrical outage swept through Spain and regions of Portugal and France yesterday, leaving millions without access to electricity, mobile, and internet services. 

While most areas regained power late on Monday night, the blackout laid bare the vulnerability of payments systems.

Many banks in Spain halted access to point-of-sale terminals, leaving shops and restaurants without ways to accept card or online payments from customers. The European Central Bank (ECB) extended its delivery versus payments deadline by an hour in a rare move, almost certainly prompted by the outage, as banks’ central securities depositories struggled to reconcile payments made during the day. 

The blackout, which affected Spain as well as the Basque regions of France and much of Portugal, including Lisbon and Porto, was due to an electrical failure in Spain’s power grid, which in turn affected the connections with its neighbors; overall, an estimated 50 million people were affected. 

The cause of the blackout is believed to be a “rare atmospheric event” that caused extreme temperature variations in Spain, leading to an imbalance in the frequency of the national power grid that had knock-on effects on all surrounding regions. Extreme temperature variations, an effect of climate change and global warming, are expected to sweep through most of Europe this week, with the UK experiencing temperatures as high as 27°C in some areas. 

The outage has had little if any economic impact, as critical infrastructure like hospitals stayed mostly unaffected and many businesses stayed open. The Spanish stock exchange remained functioning throughout the outage, opening this morning with a slight gain. However, the widespread, immediate halt in online payments highlighted the fragility of the international payments system and its reliance on underlying infrastructure. 

Spain’s central bank said that by 15:30 local time – four hours after the beginning of the blackout – its national and cross-border payments system was back to normal. However, bank branches, merchants, and individual businesses experienced problems throughout the day as card readers ran out of batteries and ATMs remained inactive. The ECB postponed the start of the delivery versus payment cut-off by an hour.

Spain is one of the most cash-dependent countries in Europe, despite efforts by the governments to encourage more uptake of online and card payments to decrease corruption. If the blackout had occurred elsewhere, the effect may have been even more pronounced, grinding national economies to a halt: the UK, for example, only has 6% of payments made in cash, compared to Spain’s 57%.

The post Spain blackout highlights fragility of payments systems appeared first on Trade Finance Global.

• Embedded payments are seamless, automated transactions integrated directly into a platform or service, allowing users to make payments without leaving the ecosystem.
• The value which they add is growing more apparent as automation becomes everyday.

The role of payments in business is undergoing a fundamental transformation. Once seen primarily as a cost centre, payments are now emerging as a critical revenue driver. Embedded payment solutions are enabling businesses to not only manage increasingly complex payment structures, but also to unlock new revenue streams. 

By seamlessly integrating payments into digital platforms, companies can enhance user experiences,  more effectively support marketplace sellers or platform users, and create more value for their ecosystems. This constant evolution in payment technology is reshaping industries, making these solutions indispensable for staying competitive and driving growth across Europe and beyond.

What are embedded payments?

The value of embedded payments lies not merely in simplifying transactions themselves: various approaches can achieve this end. Embedded payments are about the seamless management of complex payment flows between multiple parties, such as consumers, platform users, and marketplaces. These systems unify diverse financial interactions, whether it’s splitting payments, managing payouts to sellers, or reconciling fees within a platform. 

Essential features of embedded payments

When selecting an embedded payments provider, businesses should look for key features that enhance financial transactions:

1. Seamless pay-in and pay-out functionality: Businesses can manage incoming and outgoing payments in multiple currencies, providing flexibility for both merchants and customers.
2. Effortless KYC and onboarding: Integrated compliance and onboarding processes allow businesses to quickly verify and onboard new sellers, reducing friction.
3. Split payments and escrow services: These features enable funds to be securely divided among multiple parties, holding payments in escrow until conditions are met, and ensuring trust and reliability.
4. Automated dispute resolution and support: Built-in mediation tools help manage disputes efficiently, enhancing customer service and reducing administrative burdens.

For businesses, these capabilities reduce manual workloads, enhance transaction security, and foster customer loyalty. For consumers, they simplify the purchasing experience while offering greater transparency and trust.

Embedded payment solutions go beyond basic transaction processing by introducing advanced automation, security measures, and flexible business models; they support a variety of payment structures; and essentially serve as a one-stop-shop for digital transactions.

Advancements in application programming interface (API) technology and cloud-based solutions have played a crucial role in the rise of embedded payments. APIs allow seamless integration of payment capabilities into existing platforms, reducing implementation time and costs. Cloud-based infrastructure ensures scalability and security, making it easier for businesses to adopt embedded payment systems without major overhauls.

Real-world applications across industries

Across Europe, businesses are leveraging embedded payments to drive growth and innovation:

• Retail: As retail marketplaces expand, the need for seamless payment setups grows. Effective payment solutions must support split payments across multiple sellers while maintaining a frictionless omnichannel experience for customers, both in-store and online.
• Hospitality: Restaurants and service providers rely on platform businesses and ISVs to consolidate operations, streamline management, and enhance efficiency—integrating embedded payments as part of these platforms improves transactions and generates additional revenue.
• Marketplaces: Online marketplaces enable sellers to sign up, sell, and receive payments effortlessly, fostering business expansion.

The future of embedded payments: AI and automation

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are set to further develop embedded payments. AI-powered fraud detection, personalised transaction flows, and predictive analytics will make payment experiences even more intuitive and secure. For businesses aiming to stay ahead, embedded payments are no longer just an advantage—they’re a necessity. As new technologies continue to reshape commerce, integrating these solutions allows companies to unlock greater value from payments.

The post Back to basics: The role of embedded payments appeared first on Trade Finance Global.

StoneX Group, the New York-based financial services company, has announced a strategic partnership with Bamboo Payment Systems to strengthen its cross-border payment capabilities in Latin America.

The company will make an undisclosed investment in Bamboo as part of the deal. The partnership aims to improve foreign exchange pricing, settlement reliability and cash flow efficiency for global merchants and financial institutions operating in the region.

StoneX Payments, which offers settlement options in more than 140 currencies across 180 countries, will combine its foreign exchange (FX) expertise with Bamboo’s proprietary platform, which connects to over 600 local banks and financial institutions throughout Latin America.

Bamboo’s proprietary payment platform is connected to more than 600 local banks and financial institutions, across 11 countries in the region. 

Thiago Vieira, global head of StoneX Payments, said the partnership would “set a new standard in global payment services” by combining the companies’ respective strengths.

In reciprocal benefit, StoneX will gain immediate access to this regional foundation, while Bamboo will benefit from enhanced international banking relationships. Revenue can be unlocked regarding FX pricing and settlement efficiency.

The partnership remains subject to regulatory approval, with financial terms undisclosed.

The post StoneX forms Latin American payments partnership with Bamboo appeared first on Trade Finance Global.

The PSR, which oversees payment networks such as Faster Payments and Mastercard, will see its responsibilities consolidated into the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), in order to make the regulatory landscape more coherent by reducing the number of bodies that payment firms must engage with.

“For too long, the previous Government hid behind regulators – deferring decisions and allowing regulations to bloat and block meaningful growth in this country,” Prime Minister Starmer said in a statement. “And it has been working people who pay the price of this stagnation.”

Payment system firms had to engage with three different regulators, which has raised complaints, particularly regarding the disproportionate burden of this complexity on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

Chancellor Rachel Reeves highlighted the SME impact, stating, “The regulatory system has become burdensome to the point of choking off innovation, investment and growth. We will free businesses from that stranglehold, delivering on our Plan for Change to kickstart economic growth and put more money into working people’s pockets.”

The PSR, with 160 employees and a £28 million annual budget, is already housed in the same east London headquarters as the FCA and shares senior staff, including its leader David Geale, who is an FCA director. Primary legislation will be required to enact the merger, with the FCA set to retain the payments agency’s powers after consolidation.

However, some officials question whether formally scrapping the PSR is worth the disruption, given it already functions essentially as an FCA subsidiary. Charles Randell, former FCA chair, cautioned that merging regulators “might be a crowd-pleasing thing to do” but doubted it would “produce payback in the life of this parliament.”

The PSR came under fire last week by Visa and Revolut, who argued that the regulator had overstepped by proposing a cap on international transaction fees. This is the latest in a string of controversial decisions made by the PSR in recent years, including its approach to introducing a mandatory refund system for payments fraud.

Responses from the payments and fintech industries have been mixed. Kamran Hedjri, CEO of PXP, welcomed the potential for simplified compliance but expressed concern that progress in areas such as Open Banking could stall if the FCA does not prioritise payments with the same focus as the PSR. On the other hand, Jonathan Frost, Director of Global Advisory for EMEA at BioCatch, downplayed the significance of the change, describing it as “little more than a branding exercise” given the existing integration between the two bodies.

The government has emphasised that the regulator will continue to have access to its statutory powers until legislation passes parliament; change will be incremental rather than immediate.

The initiative follows other deregulatory measures, including lifting the onshore wind ban, introducing the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, and setting financial services regulators on a growth agenda, as part of a wider government review of Britain’s estimated 130 regulators.

The post UK plans to scrap Payment Systems Regulator appeared first on Trade Finance Global.

At Women in Trade, Treasury & Payments 2025, Bloomberg HT spoke to Sarah Murrow, CEO of Allianz Trade UK & Ireland and Head of Women in Credit Insurance at ICISA, about the importance of driving diversity and inclusion in the credit insurance sector.

1. Supporting women in credit insurance – Allianz Trade sponsors the Women in Credit Insurance Association, a working group within ICISA, to provide mentorship, training, and networking opportunities.
2. Closing the leadership gap – While pay equity is strong in the sector, fewer women reach senior leadership roles, highlighting the need for targeted career support. 
3. Building a community – Founded in 2023, the Women in Credit Insurance Association hosts virtual and in-person events to help women advance in their careers.
4. Mentorship matters – Structured mentorship programs can equip women with the skills and confidence to take on leadership roles.
5. Industry-wide commitment – Driving diversity and inclusion requires an ongoing effort from companies, policymakers, and industry groups.

Empowering women in trade and finance starts with action—mentorship, community, and commitment to change.

#AccelerateAction

The post VOXPOP | Sarah Murrow on the importance of driving diversity and inclusion in the credit insurance sector appeared first on Trade Finance Global.

• Trump’s return to presidential office promises to challenge regulatory structures.
• Beyond the US, payment regulation is aimed at making payments cheaper, faster, and more innovative.
• The SWIFT ISO 20022 compliance deadline in November 2025 will require banks and corporate treasuries to update systems.

Without a doubt, the regulatory landscape for the year ahead is set to be demanding, with key developments including Swift’s ISO 20022 compliance deadline in November, evolving AI regulation, and the European Union’s (EU) latest updates to payment frameworks through PSD3 and the Instant Payments Regulation. Amid tightening compliance pressures, financial crime also remains a growing concern, adding to the complexity for businesses navigating these shifts.

Apologies to readers for the pun in the headline, but it was there for the taking! After all, the regulatory outlook for the remainder of the year has been much debated as US President Trump returned for his second term, promising trade tariffs and a bonfire of regulations – with many going straight in the bin. 

Interestingly, Bank of England officials in the UK have pushed back implementation of the new Basel 3.1 capital adequacy regime until 2027, as they await clarity on the US approach to capital controls now that Trump is in office. The EU is probably fearful that a regulatory and risk gap may open up between what banks can invest, and in what regions, against their capital bases if a universal adoption of the global regime isn’t followed. 

The down-the-line impact on corporate treasuries if more capital is available for mergers and acquisitions (M&A), loans, corporate bonds and so on – not to mention the inflationary potential of a possible boom on US financial markets in the event of any relaxation – is still to be seen in these early days of the new presidency. 

But one thing is certain: the regulatory outlook will change with Trump in charge. As an example, the green finance and ESG arena have already been hit as he signed an executive order to pull out of the Paris climate mitigation agreement for a second time upon his ascension. DEI also looks to be in trouble. Within days of taking office, Trump moved to scale back DEI initiatives across the federal government and federal contractors, with parts of the private sector following suit.

A regulatory freeze was another executive order signed to stop US Federal agencies from issuing any new rules until Trump has full control of the government, amidst promises of a bonfire of regulations – or at the very least a policy whereby old ones have to go if new ones are enacted. This is an effort to cut down on red tape.      

Capital adequacy confusion

“Personally, I don’t think there is enough water under the bridge since the 2008 crash and the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Credit Suisse in 2023 to tinker with the global Basel III capital adequacy rules,” said Royston Da Costa, Assistant Treasurer at Ferguson, a multinational value-added plumbing and heating product distributor. 

“The collapses of SVB and Credit Suisse reminded people what a failed bank can look like and of its potentially disastrous impact on corporate payment, investment and supply chains around the world. It was only averted in these cases thanks to government action.”   

“It must be remembered that Trump has made a number of statements in relation to any future trade or policy talks with rival nations. However, we have to wait and see what the actual outcome will be,” added DaCosta. 

“I don’t want to comment about any of Trump’s mooted 25% tariffs against China and others [at the time of interviewing, no such charges on imports to the US had yet been applied]. Ditto with his comments about the US taking over Greenland from Denmark in a geopolitical move designed to stymie any undue Russian or Chinese influence over North Pole trade routes and natural resources.” 

“But I do advise my peers to actually look at the detail, not the rhetoric of Trump to see what actually results,” he continued. “2026 is also generally expected to be a good year for economic growth in the US once the new government settles in, and we get through this year.” The huge investment released by the now defunct Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) will continue to impact the growth potential of the US economy as well – and, by extension, the world. As ever, if the US grows it helps the UK, Europe and the rest of the world to grow.   

Patrick Kunz, Managing Director, Pecunia Treasury & Finance and Founder of the Treasury Masterminds network, is in agreement that President Trump sees the world “very pragmatically” and in a transactional way. 

He is also aware the dollar (USD) needs to remain the world’s reserve currency. “Trump will protect that position,” said Kunz, adding that nevertheless: “US business and consumers need to thrive – and if that means introducing or increasing tariffs for foreign products or companies, then I believe he will do that despite any risk.”  

But, what Trump often forgets is that some regulations are hard to change or implement, at least in a short four-year term of office that goes very quickly. “Some of his envisaged changes might even be illegal, or at least subject to legal challenge, such as ideas around restricting the rights of US-born people to automatic citizenship and changing the US labour market that way. He also seems to have a lot of priorities, so not all of his grand plans will necessarily become reality – purely due to the vast scope of them and his limited time in office.”     

Kunz added, “I guess in the short-term we’ll see more protectionism and a stronger USD. Mid- to long-term the situation will stabilise and normalise, as it always does.” 

Elsewhere, Kunz believes the same principle applies on the non-Trump general global regulatory front as well. “Regulation always settles in eventually and becomes the ‘new norm’. Its driving factors come from several sources, but most noticeably regulations are enacted to deliver: 

• Protection
• Control
• Or enforcement

“The EU Instant Payments Regulation (IPR) promised us a lot for instance. But European banks are too slow or reluctant to implement it (as it costs them money), so they have needed to be forced. The latter enforcement regulatory driver applies here, although the drivers do often overlap somewhat,” he noted.

“The EU’s EMIR, MiFID and MMF reform agenda comes from a protection aspect. Avoiding a crisis in the financial markets is the paramount driver here. This is very difficult though as financial markets nowadays are very global, interconnected and react much faster to movements than was previously the case. For example, we saw Credit Suisse go down in a matter of days only recently.” 

Can more rules and regulations avoid that scenario fully in future? Kunz doubts it. “Usually, new regulations only create extra burdens on investment banking and corporate treasuries. We find ways around them concerning controls, tax or whatever it is – or a new product comes along with new and different risks.” The rise of ETFs after the 2008 crash is an example of this.       

PSD3 and IPR changing EU payments 

As Kunz alluded to, the third iteration of the EU’s Payment Services Directive (PSD3), which incorporates the IPR, is on its way. This requires payment service providers (PSPs) in the euro area to charge the same or lower fees for instant payments as they do for regular transfers is a gamechanger. The same stipulation applies to PSPs outside the euro area by 2027, offering corporates’ faster payments at a cheaper fee. 

As Gareth Lodge, Principal Analyst, Celent, noted, “While many countries in Europe have had forms of instant payments for years, the EU Instant Payment Regulation is designed to deliver the same universal experience as the single euro payments area (SEPA) across the entire continent. Universal acceptance and consistent rules and experience for all users offer clear benefits. 2025 will see which banks pull away from the pack as they embrace the opportunities that instant payments can bring.”  

As a brief aside, Lodge also noted that European initiatives such as EPI and Wero are going mainstream. “The European Payments Initiative (EPI), previously known as the Pan-European Payments System Initiative is a unified digital payment service backed by 16 European banks and PSPs. Its aim is to allow European consumers and merchants to make next-generation payments for all types of person-to-person (P2P) transfers and retail transactions via a digital wallet, called Wero. Wero is based on instant account-to-account (A2A) payments, catered for under SEPA, and will eliminate intermediaries in the payment chain and associated costs.

All of this means a lot of change in the European payments landscape. But hopefully in a beneficial way (once the pain of transition is over), certainly for corporate treasurers at least.

More generally, the over-arching PSD3 will also encourage more access and data sharing by further encouraging the adoption of open application programming interfaces (APIs) as a means of connectivity and easier data exchange. This should open up the payments marketplace to more new entrants, competition, and hopefully, cheaper pricing via the use of open banking and finance techniques – continent-wide aggregated payment processing is one possible end-use. 

The rise of open APIs is a technology trend mirrored in China, the US, and indeed globally with differing regulatory approaches to it. The technology trend forces change in and of itself. Whether regulators want to control it is another matter, but some kind of rules are necessary to ensure resiliency, privacy, anti-fraud and other measures are applied.     

“PSD3 will be good,” commented Kunz, “as it acknowledges the fact that banks are not monopolists for payments anymore in a fintech-enhanced environment. It also acts as a further EU spur to open and speed up information sharing and connectivity in financial services (FS) via the encouragement of more open API usage. This is welcome.”     

“But the EU does need to be mindful of ‘over-regulation’. The EU might be able to regulate harsher than other jurisdictions in payment and other sectors, but that could limit its innovative capacity and harm the growth of certain fintechs. We already see the EU lagging behind in this area.” 

“All the present big fintechs in the payments arena either come from Asia or the US, almost none are from the EU, with only a few exceptions. Getting the balance right between regulating and letting technology rip to evolve markets is always an issue.”    

“Throughout the remainder of 2025, I will be excited to see this battle between innovation and regulation in action,” said Kunz. Certain regulations can ‘force’ innovation (in instant payments or open API access for instance). But other rules may come from a protectionary standpoint and could therefore potentially harm innovation. Getting the balance right in the EU is crucial. Even if the idea comes from a good place innovation may shift to a less regulated market if it isn’t done well.”   

Anti-fraud initiatives  

Despite the potential downsides, the enhanced consumer protection and fraud detection measures in PSD3 via better Strong Customer Authentication (SCA) procedures is welcome – according to Kunz. He pointed to the rising tide of financial crime and fraud levels that we’ve since in recent years as a concern. Sanction compliance has also become a bigger concern for treasurers in an increasingly unstable geopolitical world.  

The Verification of Payee (VoP) service under the IPR is useful in the fight against crime, alongside strengthened SCA under the over-arching PSD3 regulation in Europe. Knowing who beneficiaries are beforehand is very important in the context of instant payments. Trying to prevent rising levels of fraud in the diminishing amount of transaction time available to financial institutions (FIs) in a real-time payment world isn’t easy, so anything that can help is welcome. 

The pan-European Fraud Pattern and Anomaly Detection (FPAD) solution from EBA Clearing is also of great interest in this area, as it seeks to deliver anonymised data, to comply with privacy stipulations, in a federated data solution that is dedicated to stopping fraud and financial crime by identifying suspicious activity faster with AI technology mining the data. After all, criminals share information on the dark web, so why shouldn’t FIs share information in the fight against them? A common anti-fraud taxonomy is being developed by the 50+ FPAD users in Europe and this should ultimately benefit end users such as corporate treasurers.

Swift is seeking to replicate this anti-fraud effort on a global scale. It has also deployed a federated data and AI investigate tool this year. The new Swift AI-powered anomaly detection service will be able to draw on the billions of transactions that flow over the Swift network to better identify and flag suspicious transactions. Banks can then take appropriate action in real time to stop fraud. It’s a case of using shared data and AI’s ability to spot suspicious activity to fight back against criminals, who themselves are increasingly using AI.  

Spotlight on artificial intelligence 

The emerging artificial intelligence area is a case in point when trying to ‘get the balance right’ between innovation and oversight. The EU has its AI Act, for example, which is the first-ever legal framework on AI. It could act as a global template for others to follow if they don’t want to just let the technology rip and aren’t concerned about governance issues. 

The EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689) lays down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence, providing AI developers and deployers with clear requirements and obligations regarding specific uses. At the same time, however, the regulation seeks to reduce administrative and financial burdens for businesses, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to encourage uptake of this useful nascent technology. Getting the balance right, while still ensuring an AI tool doesn’t go off script is the challenge.  

The AI Act is part of a wider EU package of policy measures to support the development of trustworthy AI, which also includes the AI Innovation Package and the Coordinated Plan on AI. Together, these measures seek to guarantee the safety and fundamental rights of people and businesses, while strengthening uptake, investment and innovation in AI across the EU. 

However, there is no doubt China and Asia already have a lead in this AI field and that Trump is targeting it too, so the EU will have to be careful it doesn’t scare AI investors away. The US’ $500 billion Stargate joint venture Initiative recently announced to fund the country’s future infrastructure for AI is a clear statement of intent that it wants to dominate the emerging AI field that will likely come to dominate 21st-century economics. 

China’s launch of the open source-enabled DeepSeek AI in January 2025 shows that it is serious too. The advent of DeepSeek, which so impacted US tech company stock prices and global financial markets in January 2025, could open up a space for Europe to enter the AI race in the future, as the entry stakes just got a lot cheaper. 

Theoretically, others could run their own AI models based on the DeepSeek model – and without the specific Chinese political restrictions applied. As such, the AI field, its regulation vis-à-vis geopolitical tensions, and future end-use just became very interesting. 

“I think the AI Act is diligent and well-meant regulation, but overly protective,” noted Kunz. “It will make the EU much less competitive for AI or tech-related initiatives. Founders will just go to the US or China to build there, as it is much easier. We already see this happening. China is massively ahead of Europe on AI and technology usage already in business and in daily life.”    

“So far AI in treasury has not been revolutionary because it’s often merely an extension of established Machine Learning (ML) techniques, automation, or data analytics end uses,” said Kunz. “However, it is only a matter of time until this changes, and treasury is more directly impacted by AI than it is at present. 

“The technology will bring bigger use cases in future in both information management and cashflow predictions very very soon. Not only will AI be deployed in cash flow forecasting (CFF) but also in heavy information processing procedures involving trade finance or securitisation programmes. AI can additionally help in better debt management. Asking a ChatGPT tool to find relevant clauses for a certain action to take in a 500+ page loan documentation can save loads of time, for example, and enhance efficiency.”   

ISO 20022 messaging 

Returning to the payments arena, but this time from an Asian and global perspective, Yvonne Yiu, Co-Head of Global Payments Solutions, Asia Pacific at HSBC, is focused on the Swift deadline for November 2025 this year, when all banks on its platform must use the more data-rich ISO 20022 messaging standard, which relies on the XML coding language if they want to access its global interbank payment network. 

The Swift ISO 20022 migration will see the end of its old MT messaging series. More character space on ISO 20022 enables more end uses and extra efficient payment processes for everyone in a financial supply chain, including treasurers. Many of the bigger banks have already moved to the standard – and are aiming to bring corporate clients along with them.

Yiu is pleased that HSBC has already enabled its global network of more than 50 markets to receive and forward SWIFT CBPR+ (ISO 20022-enabled) messages. Ditto the newly migrated domestic markets that can exchange ISO messaging. Indeed, HSBC has embarked on a multi-year project and will introduce changes to its online digital channels and further updates to its various payment file formats to not only meet these requirements but ensure fast benefits, justifying its investment. 

But smaller banks and others, including corporate treasuries themselves, must also migrate to ISO 20022 as well in order to get the full industry-wide benefits, without undue reliance on vendor-supplied converter tools.   

“We’ve been encouraging clients across our global network to proactively assess their readiness for ISO 20022,” said Yiu. “This is so that they can fully leverage the enriched and structured payment data to achieve improved transparency and accuracy.” 

“A crucial step on this journey is collaborating with ERP and TMS providers to determine the necessary changes and upgrades,” continued Yiu. “These changes may include accommodating new data requirements, such as debtor addresses and ultimate creditor details, in order to meet changing industry standards.”    

“Adopting ISO 20022 is not just about compliance,” added Yiu. “It’s also a transformative opportunity for the payments industry. By embracing ISO 20022, organisations can unlock significant efficiencies and greatly improve their operational capabilities.  We are committed to partnering with our clients throughout this journey, sharing expertise and providing support to ensure a seamless transition.”  

Celent’s Lodge is in agreement that 2025 is a pivotal year for ISO 20022, with deadlines for the US FedWire service imminent alongside the Swift MT migration, which will finally complete this year after much frustration among treasurers. 

“As with any complex migration, it will always be a challenge for everyone to be 100% ready by the Swift November 2025 deadline,” admitted Lodge. “By then, all payment messages sent or received through the Swift network must be based on ISO 20022 to encourage universal adoption and access to the more charter and data-rich XML-based standard. There have been herculean efforts by many so far, yet arguably the hard work actually starts next year.” 

2026 is when banks need to ensure they double down on their efforts to maximise the benefits that ISO 20022 investment can bring – not just for themselves but for treasury functions, too.

Standing on shifting sands

All this change – within Europe and without – will take shape in 2025 and alter the future of payments, trade, ESG, and beyond.  Potential trade wars are another thing to watch in what could be a volatile year.  

For corporate treasurers, navigating the remainder of the year will require both pragmatism and adaptability. Regulatory shifts, geopolitical uncertainty, and technological advancements are converging to reshape the financial landscape. The balancing act between compliance and innovation will be crucial, not only in Europe but across the globe.

One certainty amid all the uncertainty is that treasurers will need to engage more actively with their regulatory environments. Whether it’s leveraging real-time payments, harnessing AI’s potential, or ensuring seamless ISO 20022 adoption, those who anticipate the impact of regulatory change rather than merely react to it will be the best placed.

Yet, if history is any guide, regulation rarely moves in a straight line. Loopholes emerge, unintended consequences surface, and markets adjust in unexpected ways. Perhaps the real question, then, isn’t whether treasurers will ‘come up trumps’ in 2025, but whether they will be agile enough to play the hand they’re dealt.

The post Will treasurers come up Trumps? Top regulations to watch in 2025 appeared first on Trade Finance Global.

The collapse of traders like Hin Leong Trading Pte Ltd and Zenrock Commodities Trading Pte Ltd (“Zenrock”) left banks that made payments under letters of credit (LCs) out of pocket when their customers went under without reimbursing them. The banks in this predicament have, in a spate of recent cases, attempted to recoup payments under LCs made to beneficiaries whom they allege have received payments for fictitious trades. By and large, banks have had an uphill task when it comes to recovering or refusing LC payments. The law’s recognition of LCs as the “lifeblood of commerce” has permitted very limited instances of refusal to pay on LCs or recovery of sums paid under them. 

A significant clarification for banks resisting LC payments came from the Singapore Court of Appeal last year (in Winson Oil Trading Pte Ltd v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd and another suit [2024] SGCA 31). The Court of Appeal clarified that a bank may refuse payment for a presentation that the beneficiary not only knew to be false but also in respect of which it was reckless as to whether the statements it made to the bank were true or false. This is particularly acute in the oil trade where payment letters of indemnity provide representations as to the shipment of the goods and the title relating to it, which may turn out to be untrue. 

Another significant decision on the subject of LC payments from the Singapore courts last year was Banque de Commerce et de Placements SA, DIFC Branch & Anor v China Aviation Oil (Singapore) Corporation Ltd [2024] SGHC 145 (“BCP v CAO”). This Singapore High Court decision makes a number of points of practical significance which we cover in this update. 

Facts: Two parallel sales chains or one circular chain? 

The Geneva branch of Banque de Commerce et de Placements (“BCP”) issued a letter of credit to finance Zenrock’s purchase of an oil cargo from China Aviation Oil (Singapore) Corporation Ltd (“CAO”). The LC was confirmed by UBS Switzerland AG (“UBS”). In line with the usual practice in oil trading, the LC permitted payment against a payment letter of indemnity (“LOI”) (instead of original bills of lading (“BLs”)) and invoice. UBS paid against CAO’s presentation of an LOI, and was reimbursed by BCP. 

BCP sought to recover the sums it paid under the LC on the basis primarily, that the contract between CAO and Zenrock was a sham and/or fraudulent transaction, and hence that CAO had made fraudulent and/or negligent misrepresentations to BCP in its LOI. The sales chains for the cargo, as found by the Court, can be summarised as follows: 

• A chain of sales involving Petco – Zenrock – Petrolimex (“Series A”). Title in this chain passed from Petco to Zenrock when the oil passed the flange connection between the delivery hose at the loading port and the vessel’s permanent hose connection. Title, however, passed from Zenrock to Petrolimex only upon receipt of the full contract price (which was due only 30 days after the bill of lading date).  

• Another circular chain of FOB sales, Zenrock – Intermediate Seller – SEIS – CAO – Zenrock (“Series B”). Title for each of the contracts in Series B passed simultaneously when the oil passed the flange connection between the delivery hose at the loading port and the vessel’s permanent hose connection.

The thrust of BCP’s case was that the CAO-Zenrock contract was a sham and/or fraudulent transaction. As such, BCP alleged that CAO did not sell any physical cargo to Zenrock. Among other things, BCP argued that physical cargo only moved in the Series A chain, not the Series B chain. It accordingly argued that the representations in the LOI were false. These included representations as to 

1. The existence, authenticity and validity of documents which included the “full set of signed [BLs] issued or endorsed to [BCP Dubai] (the “BCP OBLs”)”, 
2. Entitlement to possession of the documents which included the BCP OBLs; 
3. Entitlement to possession of the cargo immediately prior to the cargo coming into Zenrock’s possession; 
4. CAO having title to the cargo immediately before title passed to Zenrock. 

Zenrock was found to have acquired title from Petco before the Series B transactions commenced and was required to pass title to Petrolimex only after it was re-vested with title in Series B. 

As such, the Series A transactions were found to co-exist with the Series B, instead of being mutually exclusive. 

The evidence from the Court’s judgment supporting a co-existence of both trades appears to be grounded on the provision that title to Petrolimex passed on payment while the rest of the parties operated on title passing at the load port flange. It remains open for consideration if the same finding would have been found if all parties, including Petrolimex, operated on the basis of title passing at the load port flange – after all, only one party can have title at any time and the sequencing of the passing of title is critical. 

Finding: Was the Zenrock-CAO Contract a sham? 

One of the arguments asserted by BCP was that there was no physical shipment because the CAO-Zenrock contract was a sham. The Court disagreed with this assertion for a number of reasons, for example:

• CAO’s personnel gave evidence of having conducted due diligence and negotiations for both the purchase and sale leg of the transaction; exchanged deal recaps; and performed operational tasks concerning vessel nomination, the appointment of an independent surveyor to witness cargo loading and inspect its quantity and quality, and checking the documents presented under the purchase leg and documents to be presented to the LC bank under CAO’s sale leg to Zenrock.
• There was a legitimate commercial reason for Zenrock to conclude Series A and Series B transactions: to secure funds for an additional 35 days. 
• The mere fact that the transaction was concluded speedily, and did not envisage the exchange of original BLs, did not point to it being a sham since it is not unusual for oil cargoes to be sold promptly, and it is industry practice for LOIs to replace BLs for oil trades. 
• As a matter of industry practice, there was nothing unusual with a CAO not investigating the participants in the entire sales chain beyond its immediate buyers and sellers. 
• As title passed simultaneously in Series B, Zenrock was revested with title, and had good title before it passed title to Petrolimex. There was accordingly no reason why Zenrock would have orchestrated a sham circular trade in Series B when it could have performed both the Series A and Series B contracts legitimately. 

The Court found that on a proper interpretation, by way of the LOI, CAO represented that:

1.  The BLs had been issued (i.e., they existed, and were authentic and valid), but that 
2. They were unavailable in that they had yet to be issued or endorsed to BCP Dubai at the time of presentation, and 
3. The BCP OBLs would be endorsed to the order of BCP Dubai in due course (i.e., once CAO received them from its seller). 

None of these representations were found to be false since BLs for the cargo existed and CAO was entitled to them under its contract with SEIS. Further, since the CAO-Zenrock contract was not sham, and the full sales chain was known, the Court concluded that CAO was entitled to possession of the cargo immediately prior to it coming into Zenrock’s possession, and had good title immediately before passing title to Zenrock. 

The Court noted that BCP’s claim for misrepresentation failed for the additional reason that none of the representations in the LOI were made to BCP. The LOI was addressed to Zenrock, and in any event, presented to the confirming bank, UBS and not BCP. 

Comment: Arguments on sham and shipment

This case confirms the arduous task that a bank resisting an LC payment bears and the importance of industry practice of the particular commodity in question in deciding whether a sale contract is a sham contract. 

BCP’s argument that CAO did not ship any physical cargo to Zenrock was seemingly predicated on its position that the CAO-Zenrock contract was a sham and/or fraudulent transaction. This contrasts with how the banks argued the case in Winson. There, in alternative to arguing that the underlying sale contracts were sham, the banks also separately argued that the cargo was not shipped as described. The Court in Winson did not have to address the issue of sham as it was satisfied that the cargo was not shipped as described. 

Given sham entails an enquiry into parties’ subjective common intentions, it is preferable for a party resisting payment to plead it as an alternative argument to an objective challenge regarding the underlying shipment, which may be easier to establish. However, the outcome in BCP v CAO is unlikely to have been different even if the underlying shipment was challenged since the Court found that the sales chains in Series A and Series B were not mutually exclusive. 

It is further noted that BCP curiously failed to plead that CAO’s presentation under the LC was fraudulent, i.e., the fraud exception to payment under LCs. Rather, its pleadings focused on the fraudulent representations in the LOI, i.e., the tort of deceit. Whilst the Court noted that the elements of the fraud exception and the tort of deceit are similar, BCP was not allowed to rely on the fraud exception as the two causes of action have different juridical basis and CAO would be prejudiced if BCP is allowed to rely on the fraud exception. A payment LOI is often used as one of the documents needed for an LC payment. Careful consideration needs to be given to the interplay of these two documents when seeking to raise arguments based on fraud.

The post Clawing back LC payments: BCP v China Aviation Oil appeared first on Trade Finance Global.

Much effort is spent in the trade finance community finding ways to increase access to financing – perhaps one of the industry’s main missions. However, accessibility comes in many forms: a recent Asian Development Bank project focused on tackling disability inclusion, promoting accessibility in partner banks across Asia. In a webinar on 6 February 2025, ADB’s (ADB) Trade and Supply Chain Finance Program (TSCFP) discussed the project and how it supports banks in targeting access for people with disabilities.

The Disability Inclusion Project, pioneered by the TSCFP in partnership with the Global Disability Innovation Hub (GDI Hub), was first launched two years ago to further ADB’s goal of financial inclusion and extend it to people with disabilities, an often-overlooked group in the finance world. The project aims to both increase access to finance products for those with disabilities and to raise awareness within companies of disability issues, modifying hiring practices and internal processes to be more accessible. 

For the past two years, partner banks have received bespoke advice to tackle accessibility issues and have implemented change in almost every aspect of their operations. Now, the knowledge tools used in the project are being released to all institutions and as a sector resource in a drive to improve accessibility everywhere in the banking world.

Visible and invisible barriers

Increasing access to people with disabilities is an increasingly urgent goal in a world with an ageing population and rising inequality: one in six people have a disability, many of them developed later in life, and disabilities disproportionately affect those with a low income, exacerbating their lack of access to basic services and employment. 

After a call by a number of international trade agencies to increase accessibility last year, many companies have reviewed their access policies, but still, only 4% of companies are focused on disability inclusion. Barriers stopping people with disabilities from accessing basic services can range from the evident (physical impediments like a webpage not designed for screen readers) to the “invisible” barriers (like inaccessible communication styles). 

Increasing inclusion isn’t just a tangential goal – it should be one of a company’s top priorities, and for good reason. “Integrating accessibility and inclusion helps serve 1 in 6 customers, attract diverse talent, reduce legal risks, and avoid future retrofitting costs; in essence driving sustainable business growth and innovation,” said Catherine Holloway, Professor of Interaction Design and Innovation at UCL’s Interaction Center and co-founder of the GDI Hub.

ADB’s inclusion drive

In the two-year project, ADB’s TSCFP performed wide-ranging research on 88 partner banks across 14 countries to identify the problem and set out ways to fix it. The survey, led by GDI Hub found that most banks were at the early stages of taking steps on disability inclusion: they had realised an accessibility problem existed and were only just starting to find ways to tackle it, but did not yet have concrete plans implemented in all departments.

The main issues found by the survey were employee and management awareness of disability issues, a lack of physical and digital accessibility, and non-inclusive employment practices. For example, some banks still required the physical presence of clients at non-accessible branches for some operations; some hiring managers felt applicants to their positions may not disclose a disability for fear of discrimination, making the drive for access even harder. Overall, while banks realised the importance of disability inclusion, they were struggling to turn this into concrete actions to increase accessibility. 

The project supported banks in the areas they themselves said they needed the most help: employee training, increasing branch accessibility, promoting inclusion in recruitment, and measuring the impact of projects. Banks received a detailed action plan with recommendations to improve accessibility, most of which were taken up. Now that the project is over, ADB is sharing the insights gained with all banks in the hopes of increasing accessibility everywhere.

Case in point: Increasing accessibility in Pakistan and Georgia

One place with a sizeable impact is the National Bank of Pakistan. The bank responded to regulatory policy by converting 28 of its nearly 1700 branches to completely accessible “model branches” with ramps, accessible bathrooms, and height-adjusted counters.  

With support from the project, the bank made its hiring practices more inclusive, collaborating with local disability advocacy groups to make sure recruitment processes and job advertisements put accessibility at the forefront. In an effort to help employees with disabilities, the bank set up a program to give employees wheelchairs and move some of them to branches closer to their own homes, as well as providing visually impaired employees with interpreters and scribes. 

The ADB’s support made it possible for banks to turn vague inclusion goals into concrete action, said Saman Abbasi, Divisional Head of Learning and Development of the National Bank of Pakistan: “We received more insights on global best practices, leading us to get better awareness of internal challenges. We have adopted a more strategic approach towards PWD inclusion. At National Bank, the commitment to inclusivity comes from the top. We held conclusive discussions with Senior Management on career planning, role mapping, and capability enhancement of our PWD staff.” 

In Georgia, TBC Bank has been undergoing a similar journey towards inclusivity. After realising disability inclusion was a priority, TBC Bank decided to integrate it in nearly every aspect of its services through the project: “It’s important for us to make out of this whole story something which creates economic value and goes beyond humanitarian or philanthropy work. […] In the process, we understood that in order to create, again, this economic value, we have to approach this topic with a more comprehensive view,” said Maka Bochorishvili,  Environmental Social and Governance Coordinator at TBC Bank.

After identifying 6 streams where accessibility could be improved, TBC Bank set out actionable ways to implement change—from setting up seminars to improve company culture toward people with disabilities to transforming mobile apps to be accessible to auditing branches from an accessibility perspective. 

TBC Bank also used its role as the leading financial institution in Georgia to improve disability inclusion beyond its own employees: developing guidance to embed accessibility across festivals TBC Bank sponsors (Tbilisi Open Air, Saba Award) both strategically and operationally.

Beyond bespoke: Knowledge tools for accessibility everywhere

Parallel with targeting individual banks, the ADB’s Disability Inclusion Project has also been developing knowledge tools to share with banks everywhere to help assess and improve their accessibility. From self-evaluation questionnaires measuring accessibility across four key parameters – employment, culture, access to products, and partnerships – to concrete recommendations at every step of institutions’ inclusion journeys, the tools are designed to fit the needs of a range of banks across regions and service types.

What sets the ADB’s knowledge tools apart from the rest is their focus on banks and the unique challenges they face in implementing accessibility. “The [tools] have really been developed with [banks], for [banks], integrating knowledge of both the banking sector as relates to the practices that banks deliver, but also bringing in that global best practice in terms of disability inclusion under corporate constraints,” said Pollyanna Wardrop, Senior researcher at the GDI Hub.

—

ADB’s project has already had a wide-ranging impact on the banks involved, raising awareness of inclusion needs and implementing concrete change. The knowledge tools it has just unveiled promise to go even further, giving all institutions a way to understand disability issues and improve accessibility.

The post Driving disability inclusion forward: ADB’s new project targets accessibility in banking appeared first on Trade Finance Global.

A newly released Visa report into cross-border payments consumer preferences shows a booming industry with a young, varied client base who prioritises security in their payment decisions. Despite a growing range of cross-border payments providers, most users still haven’t found a single trusted platform, instead using multiple different methods and platforms according to their specific needs. 

This, the report indicates, is a golden opportunity for payment providers, who can take advantage of a growing, uncommitted market to build a client base and establish themselves as the trusted, go-to platform for all cross-border payments.

An expanding industry

The Visa report surveyed 6,500 people who had made cross-border payments in the previous year and asked them about their habits, preferences, and trusted providers. With an estimated $250 trillion flowing through cross-border payments by 2027, a rise of $100 trillion from the 2017 figures, cross-border payments are a staple of the modern economy, used by a staggering 771 million people every year. 

From enabling travel, transferring vital remittance flows, facilitating online commerce, and supporting foreign investment and donations, cross-border payments are set to have an ever-growing role in an increasingly connected world. With over half of the respondents travelling abroad multiple times a year and 45% sending or receiving monthly remittances, there is a wide-ranging demand for safe and reliable payment providers.

The sheer scale of cross-border payments is hard to capture with numbers, with many payments involving small sums which are nonetheless critical lifelines for receivers. About a third of respondents made weekly cross-border payments, and the number rises for young people: 84% of Gen Zers, the youngest group surveyed, made corss-border payments, along with 83% of Millennials. 

The search for providers

The prevalence of cross-border payments and growing customer base make the lack of established players all the more surprising. While 66% of consumers surveyed wanted a single, reliable payments provider, only 16% had found a default payment method they could consistently rely on. 

Right now, both payment providers and methods change according to the transaction: credit or debit cards are the preferred method for e-commerce transactions and travel-related payments, while remittances flow mainly through bank transfers.

While 20% of consumers would like to have a wider variety of options for transactions, some reported feeling overwhelmed by the choices, especially those mainly sending and receiving remittances. However, customers seem to be solidifying their habits, moving from multiple providers and methods to one trusted platform: 66% of respondents said that if they found a payment option that worked, they would stick with it. Convenience and trust seem to trump variety, as about half of customers prefer to keep all their money in one account and use one single provider for all their transactions.

Changing priorities

Before convenience, affordability, or reliability, however, customers value security in their cross-border payments above all else. Security was by far the most important factor for customers when choosing a cross-border payment method across all age groups and regions surveyed, ranked by 61% of customers as their number one concern.

This may be due to the prevalence of fraud, scams, delays, and other negative experiences in cross-border payments, reported by a staggering 21% of customers and especially by younger users (‘Gen Z’). 

Customers are increasingly conscious of fraud risks, with over half of those surveyed having stopped a transaction out of fear of fraud. This fear is present across a range of payment methods, from credit card transactions to bank transfers, but it tends to be more prevalent when payments are made through newer market entrants that don’t have the same levels of consumer trust as traditional, established players. 

Consumers expect payment providers to anticipate these risks: 88% of respondents said they want banks and fintech to establish safety measures and increase security. Simple systems like confirmation of purchase, payments tracking, and recipient verification can go a long way toward making customers feel their money is in good hands and increasing trust. 

To reassure customers about delays and hidden fees, which especially worry those sending remittances, companies should be upfront about payment processing times and the costs of a transaction.

—

Ultimately, the Visa report’s lasting message is that the cross-border payments industry is ripe for picking. Transaction volumes are skyrocketing, and a young, varied, and informed customer base knows its options and is shopping around for a go-to provider with security at the forefront. 

Cross-border payment providers, from traditional players to new market entrants, have a unique opportunity to establish themselves as the trusted choice and build a solid customer base that will only keep growing. Customer priorities—security, reliability, and variety of options—are clear; payment providers should step up to the plate and build the cross-border payment platforms that customers want. 

The post Visa report reveals growing cross-border payments market shifting towards security appeared first on Trade Finance Global.