金融科技和支付監(jiān)管-分析框架

1、 2020 International Monetary FundWP/20/75IMF Working PaperMonetary and Capital Markets DepartmentFintech and Payments Regulation: Analytical Framework Prepared by Tanai Khiaonarong and Terry Goh* Authorized for distribution by Jihad AlwazirMay 2020IMF Working Papers describe research in progress by

2、the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to encourage debate. The views expressed in IMF Working Papers are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the IMF, its Executive Board, or IMF management. HYPERLINK /en/Topics/imf-and-covid19 Disclaimer: This docume

3、nt was prepared before COVID-19 became a global pandemic and resulted in unprecedented economic strains. It, therefore, does not reflect the implications of these developments and related policy priorities. We direct you to the IMF Covid-19 page that includes staff recommendations with regard to the

4、 COVID-19 global outbreak.AbstractFinancial technology (Fintech) has prompted authorities to consider their potential financial stability benefits, risks, and effective regulation. Recent developments suggest that regulatory approaches and their legal foundations need to augment entity-based regulat

5、ion with increasing focus on activities and risks as market structure changes. This paper draws on recent international experiences in modernizing legal and regulatory frameworks for payment services. An analytical framework based on a four-step process is proposed(i) identifying payment activities;

6、 (ii) licensing entities and designating systems; (iii) analyzing and managing risks, and (iv) promoting legal certainty. As payment activities evolve and potential systemic risks heighten, adherence to international standards and additional regulatory requirements should be warranted.JEL Classifica

7、tion Numbers: E42 E58 E59 G28 K20 O38 Keywords: Fintech, payment services, central bank, regulationAuthors E-Mail Address: HYPERLINK mailto:tkhiaonarong tkhiaonarong; HYPERLINK mailto:terrygohph terrygohph*Terry Goh was formerly with the Monetary Authority of Singapore. We thank Wouter Bossu, Jess C

8、heng, Simon Gray, Dong He, Kathleen Kao, Aditya Narain, Harish Natarajan, Kristel Poh, Alexandre Stervinou, Jan Vermeulen for helpful comments and suggestions. An earlier version was presented at the Joint European Central BankNational Bank of Belgium Retail Payments Conference in Brussels on Novemb

9、er 27, 2019. Karen Lee helped with research and Wifianni Wirsatyo provided editorial assistance.ContentsPage HYPERLINK l _TOC_250013 Abstract 2Glossary 5Motivation for Analytical Framework 6Step OneIdentifying Activities as Payment Services 8 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250012 Payment Services 8 HYPERLINK l _T

10、OC_250011 Mobile Money and Payments 11 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250010 Digital Payment Tokens 12Step TwoLicensing Entities and Designating Systems 13 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250009 Licensing Entities for Prudential Supervision 14 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250008 Designating Payment Systems for Oversight 16Step ThreeAnalyzi

11、ng and Managing Risks 19 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250007 Funds Protection 20 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250006 Financial Integrity 21 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250005 Cyber and Data Security 22 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250004 Access to Payment Systems 23 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250003 Interoperability 25Step FourPromoting Legal Certainty 25

12、Policy Issues for Central Banks 29 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250002 Payments Stability 29 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250001 Financial Stability 30 HYPERLINK l _TOC_250000 Monetary Stability 31Conclusion 32References 33TablesBig Tech Payment Activities 10Licensing of Payment-Related Activities 16Payment Infrastructures

13、 and Regulation 19Risk MapRating Payment Activities by Their Potential Impact 19FiguresAnalytical Framework for Payments Regulation 8Taxonomy of Payment Services 9Global Mobile Money Transaction Values by Activity and Region in 2018 11Licensing and Designation of Nonbank Payment Service Providers 13

14、Key Considerations for Promoting Legal Certainty 26BoxesEuropean UnionPayment Activities of Telecom Operators 12Regulation of Digital Payment Tokens in Selected Jurisdictions 14Licensing and Threshold Values in Selected Jurisdictions 17CanadaLegal Reforms for Retail Payments Oversight 26European Uni

15、onKey Legislations for Payment Related Activities 28AppendixLicensing Practices for Mobile Network Operators by Region 36GLOSSARYAIArtificial IntelligenceAMLAnti-Money LaunderingAPIAuthorized Payment InstitutionBCBSBasel Committee on Banking SupervisionBISBank for International SettlementsCBRCorresp

16、ondent Banking RelationshipCPMICommittee on Payments and Market InfrastructuresCPSSCommittee on Payment and Settlement SystemsECEuropean CommissionELMIElectronic Money Institution (in the European Union)EMIElectronic Money Institution (in the United Kingdom)EUEuropean UnionEUREuroFATFFinancial Actio

17、n Task ForceFINMASwiss Financial Market Supervisory AuthorityFMIFinancial Market InfrastructureFSBFinancial Stability BoardGSCGlobal StablecoinGSMAGroupe Speciale Mobile AssociationIADIInternational Association of Deposit InsurersICOInitial Coin OfferingIMFInternational Monetary FundMLMachine Learni

18、ngMNOMobile Network OperatorMPIMajor Payment Institution (in Singapore)ORPSOther Retail Payment SystemsOTCOver the CounterPFMIPrinciples for Financial Market InfrastructuresPIPayment InstitutionPIRPSProminently Important Retail Payment SystemsPPSPostal Payment ServicePS ActPayment Services Act of Si

19、ngaporePSD2Payment Services Directive 2 of the European UnionPSPPayment Service ProviderSGDSingapore DollarSIPSSystemically Important Payment SystemSPIStandard Payment Institution (in Singapore)SPISmall Payment Institution (in the United Kingdom)SWIPSSystem-Wide Important Payment SystemsTATechnical

20、AssistanceUNCITRALUnited Nations Commission on International Trade LawVAVirtual AssetVASPVirtual Asset Service ProviderMOTIVATION FOR ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORKFinancial technology (Fintech) has prompted authorities to consider their potential financial stability benefits, risks, and effective regulation.

21、 HYPERLINK l _bookmark0 1 Payments, clearing and settlements is one area where material fintech developments and experimentations have rapidly evolved. This spans across large-value, retail, and cross-border payments. Changes in the retail payment services landscape is among the most visible so far.

22、 Motivations have been varied, including promoting cashless-ness, competition, financial inclusion, financial integration, and innovation to addressing correspondent banking relationship (CBR) withdrawals (IMF, 2017). While there are no compelling financial stability risks given the small size of fi

23、ntech relative to the financial system, growth in such activities and the supervisory and regulatory issues have merited authorities attention (IMF, 2019; FSB, 2017a).Authorities regulate payment systems and payment service providers (PSPs) for many reasons. They include: to maintain the integrity o

24、f the monetary system, safeguard financial stability by ensuring final settlement of monetary transfers, and protect consumers with regards to non-currency money (commercial bank book money and e-money) that entail credit risks. Fintechs impact on financial stability may also change quickly with the

25、 market entrance and expansion of large technology firms into payment services.Fintech developments suggest that regulatory approaches and their legal foundations need to augment entity-based regulation with increasing focus on activities-based approaches, as market structure changes. Financial regu

26、lation has been traditionally based on the regulation of types of entities or intermediaries performing broad functions such as payment systems (He et al., 2017). Licensing regimes will need to be redesigned to bring new types of service providers within the regulatory perimeter, where appropriate,

27、including fintech and large technology firms, or Big Tech (BIS, 2019; FSB, 2019a; Frost et al., 2019; Restoy, 2019).Some jurisdictions have modernized their legal and regulatory framework for payment services, using an activity-based and risk-focused approach. HYPERLINK l _bookmark1 2 Modernization

28、efforts have aimed to foster safety, efficiency, innovation and competition. New business models for payment services have blurred the lines of payment related products that may for example, require licensing as an electronic money issuer and a money remittance business, leading to overlapping regul

29、ation; or gaps in regulation if the product is licensed as one but not the other. In modernizing the oversight framework, there is thus a need to align relevant1 The Bali Fintech Agenda proposed a framework that focused on 12 relevant elements, including financial sector resilience, risks, and inter

30、national cooperation (IMF/World Bank, 2018). Payments and settlement systems, and central bank digital currency were among the key issues identified as meriting further attention (IMF/World Bank, 2019).2 For illustration, this has included the European Union and Singapore. Canada has also initiated

31、reforms to the oversight framework for retail payments (Department of Finance Canada, 2019).regulations and amend the scope of regulated activities to facilitate new business models and payment entities. At the same time, these new business models present emerging risks which may not be addressed, o

32、r adequately addressed, under current regulatory regimes.This paper proposes an analytical framework for regulating retail payment services and is aimed at strengthening their oversight and supervision. This is particularly relevant for countries whose retail payment oversight frameworks are evolvin

33、g in response to the changing financial landscape. While there is currently a lack of international standards, there are emerging best practices. HYPERLINK l _bookmark2 3 Recent experiences are largely drawn from the European Union, Singapore, the United Kingdom and other relevant jurisdictions. HYP

34、ERLINK l _bookmark3 4The analytical framework is organized around four key steps (Figure 1). Although laid out in a sequential manner, certain steps in the framework may need to occur contemporaneously. That is, promoting legal certainty could be generally applicable throughout, and identifying and

35、addressing regulatory gaps could be an exercise that is specifically sequenced. The remainder of the paper discusses each step. Section II identifies activities that are considered payment services. Section III discusses licensing and designation. Section IV examines the major risks and their manage

36、ment. Section V considers legal certainty. Section VI discusses policy issues for central banks. Section VII concludes.3 International principles and guidance of relevance have focused on systemically important payment systems (CPSS, 2001), oversight of payment and settlement systems (CPSS, 2005), n

37、ational payment system development (CPSS, 2006), international remittance services (CPSS/World Bank, 2007), financial market infrastructures (CPMI/IOSCO, 2012), and payment aspects of financial inclusion (CPMI/World Bank, 2016).4 Nearly half of the regulatory agencies surveyed by the Basel Committee

38、 on Banking Supervision have considered new regulations or guidance related to Fintech (BCBS, 2018).Figure 1. Analytical Framework for Payments RegulationSource: Authors.STEP ONEIDENTIFYING ACTIVITIES AS PAYMENT SERVICESPayment ServicesThe first step of the framework is to identify if an economic ac

39、tivity undertaken by the entity is a payment service. Their identification helps to design effective oversight and supervisory frameworks, while avoiding unnecessary overlaps and/or duplication of regulatory efforts. International experiences suggest that such activities could be organized into 6 gr

40、oups, including: (i) account issuance; (ii) electronic money issuance; (iii) domestic funds transfer; (iv) cross-border funds transfer; (v) merchant acquisition; and (vi) digitalpayment tokens (Figure 2). HYPERLINK l _bookmark4 5 These mainly relate to services delivered to payment service users, an

41、d are not focused on payment systems.Figure 2. Taxonomy of Payment ServicesSource: Adapted from EU Payment Services Directive 2 and Singapore Payment Services Act. See full details in the legal instruments.Explicit payment service laws help provide clarity on the activities. The EU Payment Services

42、Directive 2 (PSD2) of 2015 (Article 4) provides a definition for payment services as any business activity associated with 8 types of activities annexed to the Directive. HYPERLINK l _bookmark5 65 This list is not exhaustive and could differ by jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions have introduced regula

43、tory sandboxes, which is not in the scope of this paper. For illustration, see IMF (2019). Other new forms of payment services have included third party initiation, tokenization, payment gateways, payment aggregators, and white label ATM/POS providers, which are not in the scope of this paper. Digit

44、al payment token services are included based on recent market and regulatory developments.6 The EU PSD2 (Annex 1) groups payment services as: (i) services enabling cash to be placed on a payment account as well as all the operations required for operating a payment account; (ii) services enabling ca

45、sh withdrawals from a payment account as well as all the operations required for operating a payment account; (iii) execution of payment transactions, including transfers of funds on a payment account with the users PSP or with another PSP; (iv) execution of payment transactions where the funds are

46、covered by a credit line for a payment service user; (v) issuing of payment instruments and/or acquiring of payment transactions; (vi) money remittance; (vii) payment initiation services; and (viii) account information services.Singapores Payment Services Act (PS Act) of 2019 defines payment activit

47、ies into 7 categories for the purpose of licensing (Part 2, Section 6; Part 1 of the First Schedule). HYPERLINK l _bookmark6 7Certain payment activities could be excluded from payment service laws. The EU PSD2 (Article 3) determines its non-applicability to 15 payment activities such as cash, paper-

48、based payment instruments (checks, drafts, vouchers, postal money orders), and ATM cash withdrawal services in the EU. HYPERLINK l _bookmark7 8 The Singapore PS Act (Part 2, Section 13) exempts certain persons and entities from the requirement to have in force a license to carry on a business of pro

49、viding any payment service, and describes clearly activities that are not considered payment services (Part 2 of the First Schedule) in Singapore.Big Techs also handle payment services as part of e-commerce with some offering them as independent business units. Their business models leverage on thei

50、r data analytics, network externalities, and interwoven activities, coupled with distinct platforms that process and settle payments, including: (i) overlay system (using third-party infrastructures such as credit card or retail payment systems); and/or (ii) proprietary system (using firm-owned infr

51、astructures) (BIS, 2019). Some common business applications include digital wallets, online banking, and domestic and cross-border funds transfers. Table 1 provides an overview of payment services provided by selected Big Techs.Table 1. Big Tech Payment ActivitiesApproximate OfferingsPayment Service

52、Google PayAmazon PayFacebook PayLine PayApple PayBaidu WalletAlipayTencent We Chat PayAccount issuanceYYYYYYYYE-money issuanceNNNYYYYYDomestic funds transferNYYYYYYYCross-border funds transferNNNNNYYYMerchant acquisitionNYNYYYYYDigital payment tokenNNNNNNNNNote: For illustrative purposes and non-exh

53、austive. Other examples are in Africa (M-Pesa) and the Nordic countries (Swish, Vipps, MobilePay) among others. Some services are available in certain countries and not others. Based on publicly available information and not actual submission of business models.Source: Authors.7 This includes: (i) a

54、ccount issuance service; (ii) domestic money transfer service; (iii) cross-border money transfer service; (iv) merchant acquisition service; (v) electronic money issuance service; (vi) digital payment token service; and (vii) money-changing service.8 The identification or exclusion of certain paymen

55、t services may vary across jurisdictions and does not imply that other relevant legislation or regulation are not applicable. For illustration, the penetration and use of mobile money may be more significant in some countries than others.Mobile Money and PaymentsMobile money service delivery could b

56、e account-based or cash-based. Such services have distinct features from traditional banking, including: (i) transferring of money and making and receiving payments using the mobile phone; (ii) availability to the unbanked (people without access to a formal account at a financial institution); and (

57、iii) exclusion of mobile banking or payment services that offer the mobile phone as just another channel to access a traditional banking product. HYPERLINK l _bookmark8 9 The high penetration of mobile phones has led to the proliferation of such services. Mobile money services offered by mobile netw

58、ork operators (MNOs) could be grouped into 8 payment-related activities for harmonizing statistical collection. HYPERLINK l _bookmark9 10 A large share of transaction values relating to mobile money services have originated from person-to-person transfers and cash-related activities as compared to a

59、ir-time top-ups or international remittances (Figure 3).Figure 3. Global Mobile Money Transaction Values by Activity and Region in 2018Source: GSMA9 See Groupe Speciale Mobile Association (GSMA) Global Mobile Money program and dataset.10 This includes: (i) air-time top-ups funded from customer accou

60、nts (excluding purchases of airtime funded by OTC payments); (ii) bill payments using mobile money; (iii) bulk disbursement (such as salary payments, government or nongovernment organization transfers, regardless of whether they terminated in an account or OTC); (iv) cash-in to customer accounts (ex