Alternatives to banks – Is Fintech the answer?

| 14-12-2017 | treasuryXL |

With the steady rise of Fintech within the finance industry some people are already calling for the demise of banks as the historical financial partner of choice for corporates. Certainly, Fintech is showing itself to be very dynamic, offering many new products and solutions, and being a lot swifter than the banks. Banks seem to have grown too big and complacent, are being weighed down by new rules and regulations, are less prominent in the field of funding for corporates, and possibly have lost their focus on what used to be core businesses. But let us examine the relationship between bank and client.

The roles of a bank

Banks are, first and foremost, used so that clients can obtain and use financial services. Opening and maintaining accounts enable money to be received and paid – in this way the day-to-day financial operations of the client can be performed. Furthermore, banks offer additional services that compliment the needs of a client – business credit cards for key staff, sales services such as processing of credit card payments for goods, payroll services, online banking, loans and lines of credit.

What does a client want from a bank?

One of the main priorities is that there is an established history and a good working relationship – that the bank understands the client’s needs. A key indicator of a good relationship would be the ability and the willingness of the bank to provide funding to the client. If the bank wished the client to bank and deposit their money with them, then they should be prepared to extend credit where possible – if it meets the criteria of the bank. Running any business means there will be times when liquidity is scarce and a bank that refuses to extend credit runs the risk of losing the client. Other criteria can include the cost of banking services, support given, quality of delivery, credit rating and the overall efficiency of the services.

Fintech solutions

Fintech can provide genuine alternatives to existing banking services as they can compete with modern products – like giant ocean-going tankers, banks are large and very slow to turn around. Most bank services are still paper intensive and require many authorized signatures. By digitizing services, Fintech can reduce the transaction costs and the time taken to authorize a service. Fintech orientated lending services (like B2B) are entirely online and can be quickly approved. Through lending platforms, the risk can be spread out among many lenders.

Can the banks respond?

Banks have at their disposal very large existing customer bases and a wealth of proprietary data relating to the behaviour and patterns of their clients. This is a large untapped potential that does not need to be found or bought. If banks can utilize this data whilst offering a Fintech type of online service that is quicker and more efficient there is a possibility to fight back. The main option for banks would be to examine the Fintech companies and buy the ones that have the best products to compliment the requirements of the bank’s customers. As Fintech works in a different manner to traditional banking, this would require banks to develop internal incubators to discover new products and services that could be offered to customers. Alternatively, banks could look to design and implement their own solutions, but they appear to be behind the speed and knowledge of Fintech and might never be able to catch up.

One last word of advice

Realistically, Fintech offers attractive alternative solutions to banks. However, the power of the personal relationship should never be underestimated. We build relations slowly and by results – the cheapest offering does not get all the business. Having an account manager at a bank can be highly beneficial for a client – one point of contact, good understanding, a history. When things go wrong, you pick up the phone and call the account manager and he/she sorts out your problems. With Fintech, this could mean phoning numerous different companies to achieve the same result that can be obtained with just one account manager at a bank.

Choice is personal, but preference is normally determined by experience.

Gebrek aan voortgang in Voortgangsrapportage Rentederivaten MKB

| 13-12-2017 | Simon Knappstein |

De voortgangsrapportage van AFM die op 8 december 2017 gepubliceerd werd, bevat vooral oud nieuws. Er is verdere vertraging en zelfs de nieuwe door de banken afgegeven planningen zijn onzeker. Wat dat betreft had de AFM het passender “gebrek-aan-voortgangsrapportage” kunnen noemen. Het beeld wat blijft hangen na het lezen van deze rapportage is dat de AFM er zich bij neerlegt dat het nog wel eens erg lang kan gaan duren voordat dit dossier afgerond is.

De AFM noemt als reden voor de vertraging “Problemen met automatisering en data. De kwaliteit van de historische data van banken is niet in alle gevallen voldoende om efficiënt de compensatie op grond van het UHK te kunnen berekenen en controleren. Verder geldt dat de rentederivatendossiers van klanten zeer verschillend zijn en vaak bijzonder complex en dat heeft gevolgen gehad voor (de praktische uitwerking van) het UHK. Mede door deze knelpunten blijkt de uitvoering van het UHK in de praktijk complexer dan de banken, de externe dossierbeoordelaars en de AFM hadden voorzien. Dit betekent ook dat de door banken afgegeven planningen onzeker zijn.” Verder staat er: “Zo zijn bijvoorbeeld de derivaten- en lening-systemen veelal niet structureel gekoppeld en is een handmatig proces ingezet om de derivaten aan de juiste leningen te koppelen.” Dat die systemen niet gekoppeld zijn mag geen verrassing zijn voor de banken. Dus waarom dat op dit moment als oorzaak genoemd wordt mag eerder als verrassing gekwalificeerd worden.

De vraag die dit oproept is waarom de banken überhaupt hebben geprobeerd de oplossing te automatiseren.  Mijn beste gok is dat er in een eerder stadium ingeschat is dat op de bulk van de dossiers slechts alleen stap 3 (de coulance-uitkering) van toepassing zou zijn.  Het zal dan een dure misrekening zijn geweest als blijkt dat het leeuwendeel van de dossiers toch een handmatige benadering vereist. In dat geval is er een hoop geld en tijd verloren gegaan wat niet meer goed gemaakt gaat worden.
In de huidige planning, die dus onzeker is, zijn er 2 banken die verwachten eind 2017 alle aanbodbrieven te zullen hebben verstuurd, 1 bank die rekent met medio 2018 en 3 die mikken op eind 2018. Het zou nog inzichtelijker zijn als daarbij ook vermeld stond om hoeveel klanten het dan gaat per bank.
Een volgende rapportage van de AFM wordt in de zomer van 2018 verwacht. Zoals het er nu uitziet zou het al heel mooi zijn als de einddatum dan niet weer vooruitgeschoven wordt.

De AFM zegt ook in de komende periode kritisch toezicht te blijven houden op zowel de banken als de externe dossierbeoordelaars.

Simon Knappstein - editor treasuryXL

Simon Knappstein

Owner of FX Prospect

 

 

 

Lees ook: Uniform herstelkader rentederivaten mkb

Eurozone economic prospect – Goldilocks meets the bears?

| 12-12-2017 | treasuryXL |

The markets and the ECB feel that the economy is doing very well. It can be compared to Goldilocks – not too hot and not too cold. Is it possible that the Eurozone could be entering a period of continued growth with little or no immediate prospect for rising inflation? A quick scan of the relevant markets would appear to suggest that it is possible. Let us examine where the markets are now.

Long term Interest rates

Long term interest rates have been in a downward channel since the summer of 2008. 10-year EUR interest rate swaps (an acceptable benchmark) peaked just above 5% in 2008 before falling and steadying around 2% towards the autumn of 2013. After a period of relative calm, the rates continued their descent to a bottom of 0.25% around 15 months ago. Over the last 3 years, 10-year EUR interest rate swaps have averaged a yield of just 0.75% – now the yield is 0.80%.

Short term interest rates

3-month Euribor turned negative in April 2015 and has remained negative. Over the last 3 years, the yield has averaged -/- 0.20% – now the yield is -/- 0.33%. 3-month Euribor futures imply that the rate will remain negative until March 2020 and, will rise to just 0.75% by September 2022.

Economic indicators

Unemployment falling to 9.6% in 2017; 9.1% in 2018
GDP growing by 1.6% in 2017; 1.8% in 2018
Government debt to GDP ratio falling to 90.4% in 2017, 89.2% in 2018
Average maturity for new government debt extending to 13 years in 2017; 9 years in 2007

So, what could happen to trigger a reversal in this sentiment?

Share prices are rising – AEX index is up almost 15% since the start of the year
House prices are rising – in the Netherlands prices have increased by 8% over the last year. Turnover is greater with 14% more homes sold than last year.
Global debt is rising – about EUR 190 trillion. This amounts to more than 300% of the world’s annual economic output. (source IIF report)
Interest coverage ratios (ICR) are deteriorating worldwide – in Europe specifically in Germany and France. (source IIF report) This, even though interest rates are low.
Balance sheet of central banks are dangerously expanded – result of Quantitative Easing.
Historical low interest rates – leading to underestimation of risks.
Political change – a rise in “populist” parties in many countries reflecting disenchanted voters

So, what about Goldilocks?

The dilemma for the ECB is that the Eurozone has, essentially, become 2 blocs – the North and the South. In the North, with increases in house prices and stock markets, and drops in unemployment; a rise in interest rates would not be deemed to be negative. However, in the South, the recovery is far behind and they welcome every form of stimulus to aid their economies.

And the moral of story – how your actions/inactions may affect others.

And remember who chased Goldilocks away – the bears (markets!)

 

If you want more information please feel free to contact us via email [email protected]

Who to choose: A generalist or a specialist?

| 11-12-2017 | Olivier Werlingshoff |

 

During the last few months this question has been on top of my mind. Is it better to specialize yourself and start a specific study?
First, we need to look at the definitions of both; a specialist is a person who is highly skilled in a specific and restricted field. A generalist is a person who is competent in several different fields or activities.

On LinkedIn you can find the 6 differences between a generalist and a specialist by “Han van Kasteren”.

 

I will mention a few:

  • Generalist can be more confronting; because they are sometimes not very familiar with procedures and will ask “strange and stupid” questions to understand the business,
  • A generalist will often use the Why question to understand the business,
  • Because a generalist is not stuck in a specific field, he can be more creative and can apply examples previously used in other fields.

But I also thought of two other differences which I would like to share with you:

  • A generalist can make an easier connection between the specific field and other departments because they are more familiar with the different other departments in a company
  • Because a generalist looks also to other departments they became more competent in selling internally their problem or their challenge to find a solution

Now I have mentioned a few bullet points I found on the internet, when can a generalist interim Treasurer be a good choice?

I would say especially in the field of cash management and working capital they could be a good choice. Both specialties have effect on different departments of the business to mention a few; controlling, sales department, procurement, tax and legal.

During my career I talked with a lot of CFO’s and financial managers of large companies and tried to understand their challenges and to help them achieve their goals. As treasurer I had my own challenges and tried to make links with other departments to achieve my goals.

I am a generalist with a passion for cash management optimization!

Olivier Werlingshoff - editor treasuryXL

 

Olivier Werlingshoff

Owner of Werfiad

 

Bitcoin – regulation and acceptance

| 06-12-2017 | Lionel Pavey |

 

As the price of Bitcoin reaches ever higher – more than $11,000 at the moment – Governments are starting to look at what regulation needs to be put into place. Bitcoin has gained a reputation as the currency of choice for tax evaders and drug traders due to its anonymity. It is a market with little or no regulation and, obviously, Governments are looking at lost revenue. Yesterday the UK Treasury stated the current anti-money regulations needs to be updated to encompass all virtual currencies.

It has been reported that criminals and terrorists have used virtual currencies to purchase illegal commodities via dark webs – ensuring complete anonymity. The proposal from the UK Treasury would mean that traders would be registered. At present, there are almost 100 ATM machines for Bitcoin transactions in the UK – with more than 70 in London. Cash can be entered into the machines and converted into Bitcoins. One transaction involved a customer paying in GBP 14,000 in cash.

For Governments, regulation would mean that the Treasury would be able to identify the owner of the money and investigate the source of the funds. Tax evasion would therefore be reduced. Naturally there are genuine investors who want to buy Bitcoin, but this can already be done via an electronic exchange.

To increase acceptance as a genuine alternative currency there needs to be a growth in financial products related to virtual currencies. Yesterday, the CBOE (Chicago Board Options Exchange) announced that it will start trading Bitcoin futures this coming Monday. Initial margins for trading will be 30 per cent and price limits will be put in place.

However, there are still many hurdles before complete acceptance can occur. It is still not a recognized currency – the retail outlets that accept payment in Bitcoin is still very small. In America, only 3 of the top 500 online retailers accept Bitcoin. Whilst the price of Bitcoin has surged in 2017, this very large price increase is having a negative effect on acceptance by retailers. As the currency has increased in value so much, there appears to be a reluctance among owners of Bitcoin to use Bitcoin to transact. It has become easier to speculate on its value than to trade for goods. This is a serious problem for a virtual currency to gain worldwide acceptance.

Another area of concern regards the transaction time. Confirmation of a transaction can take up to 20 minutes – if you ordered a coffee, then it would be cold before you could drink it!

Virtual currencies are certainly something that should be considered for the future, but until they are backed and trusted by the Government and residents of a country, they will only have a small niche marketplace.

 

 

Lionel Pavey

Cash Management and Treasury Specialist

 

 

Financial Options – the right but not the obligation

| 05-12-2017 | treasuryXL |

Debt ComplianceIn the financial industry an option is an instrument, based on financial derivatives, that enable the buyer of the option to obtain the right, but not the obligation, to buy or sell an underlying product/asset at an agreed price on or before a certain date in the future. As simple descriptions go, this requires a lot of understanding about different subjects. It is the intention of this article to clearly explain all the terms mentioned above.

 

Financial derivative
The value of an option is specifically linked to the price of an asset – referred to as the underlying instrument. This could be a share, bond, currency pair, interest rate etc.

Right, but not the obligation
When you purchase an option, this gives you the right in the future to exercise the option with the counterparty. However, you are not obligated to exercise your right.
If you have bought an option with the right to buy an asset, but the price of the asset at maturity is lower than the agreed price on the option, you are not obligated to buy the asset as it would be cheaper to buy the asset in the open market at the lower price. However, the seller of the option always has the obligation to sell to you if you exercise your option

Agreed price
This is called the strike price – it is a fixed price. If you purchase an option that gives you the right to buy the underlying instrument at EUR 65 and the market price rises to EUR 75, then you would exercise your right under the option to receive the underlying instrument at EUR 65 and either hold or immediately sell at EUR 75 for a profit (as long as the premium was smaller than EUR 10).

Buy or Sell/Call or Put
If you want the right to buy an asset in the future you purchase a Call option.
If you want the right to sell an asset in the future you purchase a Put option.

Agreed date
This is called the expiration date and means that after that date no future transaction can be derived from the option – the option expires on that date.

Premium – the cost
When you purchase an option, the seller receives a financial settlement upfront. This is called the premium. As an option can be compared to an insurance policy, the premium on an option is similar to the premium paid upfront on an insurance policy.

Premium – the price
Major components used to determine an option price include interest rates, time to expiry, volatility, intrinsic value and the current asset price. Interest rates are used to determine the time value of money between now and the expiry date. Volatility is a measure of the dispersion of the price as in statistical analysis – volatility is another word for uncertainty. The more uncertainty there is, the greater the effect on the option price. Intrinsic value is the difference between an asset’s current price and the strike price.

The underlying
This refers to the specific asset that is being traded. Normally trading is an agreed lot size. 1 option would represent 100 shares for example.

Secondary market
If options are traded with an exchange, then there is a secondary market. You could buy an option, see the price rise, but consider it would not reach the strike price. Your option could then be sold to a third party via the exchange for a higher price than the premium you paid.
If you trade privately (over-the-counter) then your option can not be sold to a third party.

Types of Options
American – can be exercised on any day before or on expiring date
European – can only be exercised on the expiry date
More exotic variations like Bermudan, Binary and Exotic

Why trade Options?
Options give you exposure to an underlying asset at the cost of the premium as opposed to the full face value. This means your position can be leveraged for the same sum of money. If you hold an asset, you can also write the underlying option – a strategy called covered option. You own the asset and receive the premium reducing the cost of the asset. But if exercised, you must deliver the asset.
You could be looking at an acquisition – by purchasing options you would have the opportunity to buy the underlying at agreed prices before the market moved up. If the acquisition fell through, it would only cost you the premium.

Options that you did not know you had bought
Early repayment of a mortgage without a penalty is a form of embedded option.
Bonds that have a convertible character – exchange at a pre-agreed price for stock
If you have arranged a credit facility via a bank for an agreed period of time, you have paid for the option to drawdown against the agreed line of credit.

Who wins?
Studies show that 75% of all options that are purchased expire without being exercised. Obviously, the winners are the writers of options as they receive the premium but are not obligated to perform. This is mostly due to changes in the market or the timing being wrong. If you purchase a call option, then you must add the premium to the strike price to obtain your gross purchase price. Only if the price rises above the gross price is it rewarding to exercise the option.

Lionel PaveyLionel Pavey – Cash Management and Treasury Specialist

[button url=”https://www.treasuryxl.com/community/experts/lionel-pavey/” text=”View expert profile” size=”small” type=”primary” icon=”” external=”1″]

[separator type=”” size=”” icon=””]

 

R3CEV Corda Platform: the blockchain app store

| 04-12-2017 | Carlo de Meijer |

App Store In May this year, fintech start-up R3 raised $107 million from a consortium of the world’s top banks. The New York-based blockchain company that works in collaboration with more than 90 banks and other financial organizations world-wide, plans to use the money to invest in further developing the Corda platform (see my blog: Corda: distributed ledger ….. not blockchain! April 6, 2016) as well as “encouraging entrepreneurs to start building on the platform though training videos and hackathons”.  

Fundraising

R3 gained momentum when it achieved this record distributed ledger technology funding in its last funding round. This figure that was raised by 40 institutions from more than 15 countries across the world (including names like Barclays, SBI, UBS, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, HSBC, ING, and Wells Fargo), is known as the largest single investment in a blockchain company to date. This is also seen as a signal that R3, with their Corda Platform, is moving in a right direction, according to many in the banking industry. This notwithstanding some of the early members left.

“R3 will use the funding to: [A]ccelerate technology development and expand strategic partnerships for product deployment. The company’s efforts will be focused on Corda, R3’s DLT platform for regulated financial institutions, and its infrastructure network, which will support a vast range of partner-built financial applications that interoperate seamlessly with each other, existing systems and networks.” R3’s press release

New members

Notwithstanding a number of early partners left the R3 consortium including JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Santander, it still attracts new members showing their viability in the blockchain arena. Like the Bahrain based Bank ABC (Arab Banking Corporation), Abu Dhabi Global Market and the International Trade and Forfaiting Association (IFTA). The latter will be involved in the various trade finance projects. Recently also the Banco de la Republico Colombia, the Colombian central bank, joined the R3 consortium. The partnership with various central banks is part of R3’s plan to diversify its consortium membership by the addition of financial regulators and government agencies.

Read the full article of our expert Carlo de Meijer on LinkedIn

 

Carlo de Meijer

Economist and researcher

 

 

Debt Compliance – can you make the grade?

| 01-12-2017 | Paul Stheeman |

Debt ComplianceWe welcome a new expert – Paul Stheeman, who immediately brings us an interesting topic that has not been covered in much detail up to now. It goes to show that there are many facets in the role of treasurer and we can constantly find new subjects that have not been approached. Thank you, Paul.

Depending on the financing method chosen, your company is likely to have debt or some kind of financial obligations to third parties. This can be in the form of loans, bilateral or syndicated, or in the form of a bond issue. In each case, the underlying agreement has to be well-documented and could be very extensive with several hundred pages of legal language which, for a non-lawyer, may be very difficult to understand.

In that documentation there will be clauses stating what the debtor is allowed and not allowed to do. Another important part of the agreement will be around financial covenants. These are usually ratios which the debtor has to regularly fulfil. It is commonly the responsibility of the Treasurer to ensure that the terms of the agreements are adhered to and to report the status of the covenants to the lenders and investors. To be able to do this the Treasurer will have to work closely with the company’s lawyers, the accountants and the Controller. He furthermore has to “educate” key internal stakeholders in the requirements, so that they also are aware of any hurdles which may prohibit them in carrying out their day-to-day business. This whole process is commonly known as debt compliance.

A loan agreement will typically have between one and five financial covenants which need to be tested and reported to the lenders on a quarterly or semi-annual basis. One of many examples of financial covenants is a coverage covenant, which requires the debtor to maintain a minimum level of earnings or cash flow relative to certain expenses, e.g. interest or debt service. Typically, such numbers are prepared in the accounting department, but the Treasurer will have to ensure that these figures are prepared timely and are within the thresholds allowed in the financing agreements. If these criteria are not met, then the debtor will be in breach of the covenant(s) and technically will be in default.

Default can also arise when so-called prohibited transactions are entered into or “basket” limits are overdrawn. In many agreements the debtor is not allowed to enter into any other financial obligation. This may in practice prohibit the debtor in carrying out his normal course of business. For example, he may be required to issue a performance guarantee. This would initially not be allowed under the agreement. Lenders therefore establish baskets with a threshold amount up to which the debtor may have a bank issue a performance guarantee. Again here, it will be the Treasurer’s responsibility to ensure that all such transactions fall within allowed business or baskets.

Being in default due to a breach of a covenant or a basket could mean that the outstanding debt becomes immediately repayable in full. This is usually neither in the interest of the debtor or the lender, so that the lender can apply for a waiver. It will depend on the seriousness of the breach, but these waivers are often agreed to by the lenders. However, there will be a fee which the lender will have to pay for the waiver and this can be quite substantial.

To summarize, debt compliance is a very important part of a Treasurer’s role as the consequences of non-compliance can at best weaken the company’s position towards its lenders and at worst be disastrous as lenders call on outstanding debt to be repaid immediately.

 

Paul Stheeman

Owner of STS – Stheeman Treasury Solutions GmbH

 

Extra Voorlichtingsavond PGO Treasury Management & Corporate Finance op 14 december

| 30-11-2017 | Robert Dekker |

Post Graduate OpleidingOp donderdagavond 14 december 2017 vindt er een Extra Voorlichtingsavond plaats voor de Postgraduate opleiding Treasury Management & Corporate Finance, aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Dit is de laatste kans voor geïnteresseerden in de opleiding die het programma in het Nederlands willen volgen.

Deze extra voorlichtingsavond is bedoeld voor geïnteresseerden die per 1 februari 2018 willen instromen. Gezien het feit dat we vanaf 1 september 2018 de opleiding (in principe) alleen nog in het Engels aanbieden, en we geïnteresseerden in de opleiding nog een allerlaatste kans willen geven het programma in het Nederlands te kunnen volgen, hebben we besloten de mogelijkheid te bieden om per 1 februari 2018 in te stromen. Dat kan, omdat wij de opleiding modulair georganiseerd hebben, hetgeen ons in staat stelt 2 keer per jaar studenten te laten instromen, namelijk per 1 september en per 1 februari.

Wellicht ken je gegadigden in jouw professionele omgeving die geïnteresseerd zijn in deze opleiding. Zij zijn van harte welkom om een indruk van de opleiding te krijgen en kennis te maken met de programmadirectie, docenten en (ex-)studenten.

Programma Extra Voorlichtingsavond 14 december 2017:
18:45 uur             Ontvangst in de Agorafoyer
19:00 uur             Start voorlichting
20:00 uur             Einde

Wij zien ernaar uit je donderdagavond 14 december aanstaande te ontmoeten.

Locatie
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Amsterdam
Zaal Agora 5 (hoofdgebouw, 3e etage, A-vleugel)

Aanmelden en informatie
Wij weten graag vooraf op hoeveel mensen we kunnen rekenen. Aanmelden kan door contact op te nemen met:
Nicole Lijs via 020-598 2171 of [email protected].

Robert Dekker – Program director postgraduate program treasury & corporate finance at the VU University

[button url=”http://www.treasuryxl.com/community/experts/robert-dekker/” text=”View expert profile” size=”small” type=”primary” icon=”” external=”1″]

 

PSD2 – Fall update and new developments

| 28-11-2017 | François de Witte |

PSD2In 2018, when PSD2 comes into force, banks will lose their monopoly on payment services and customer’s account details. Bank customers will be able to use third-party providers (TPP) to administer their payments. When a customer agrees on using the services of a TPP, then their bank has to give access to TPPs to their accounts. TPPs are then able to build and offer services that compete with the existing bank services. During the summer 2017, I published a Summer Update on PSD2. Since then, a lot of things have moved, and hence I found it the right moment to provide an update to you on some developments on PSD2, in this area.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS ARTICLE

  • 2FA: Two-factor authentication
  • API: Application Programming Interface.
  • EBA:  European Banking Authority
  • PSP: Payment Service Provider
  • PSU:   Payment Service User
  • RTS: Regulatory Technical Standards (final draft issued by the EBA on 23/2/2017)
  • SCA: Strong Customer Authentication
  • TPP:  Third Party Provider
  • OTP: One time password

Main updates on the regulatory framework

Some member states have already advised that they expect delays in the transposition of PSD2 in the national law, e.g. Belgium (by March 2018), the Netherland (by June  2018), Sweden, Poland, Spain and France.
Following countries already announced that they will be on track, e.g. Italy, Finland, Ireland, Czech Republic, Germany and Bulgaria.
By end November the EBA should publish the revised draft on the SCA (Strong Customer Authentication) and Secure Communication. We expect that a number of points, raised by the market participants, will be incorporated in the text.
With regard to the access to TPPs, article 113.4 of PSD2 explicitly states that the member states shall ensure the application of the security measures within18 months following the entry in force of the law. Hence, we might expect that this part of PSD2 needs only to be implemented by Q3 2019. However, in some countries, the authorities are pushing for an earlier implementation (e.g. in Belgium by end Q1 2018). Given the strategic importance and the IT act, I recommend starting this quite soon.

Main developments

Banks will have to implement interfaces, so they can interact with the AISPs and PISPs. This compliance with PSD2 is mandatory and all banks will have to make changes to their infrastructure deployments.
The challenge is to create standards for the APIs specifying the nomenclature, access protocols, authentication, etc.”. Banks will have to think about how their new API layers interact with their core banking systems and the data models that are implemented alongside this.

A number of working groups were constituted to further elaborate on these standards, the most important ones being the UK’s Open Banking Working Group (OBWG), the Berlin Group, and STET. Experts seem to agree that the Berlin Group Standard is the most elaborate one., as it incorporates the most relevant use cases and has been built with the latest technology standards using REST, OAuth2, JSON and HTTP-signature. It relies on ISO 20022 elements for structuring the data to be exchanged between TPPs and ASPSPs

As Marc Lainez, CEO of Ibanity, part of Isabel Group (developing API and PSD2 solutions for the XS2A and beyond) pointed out: “We can already see a fragmentation on the market. Several groups publishing specifications that are on many points different. With the RTS still being a moving target at the moment, those specifications are also incomplete as some details still need to be clarified. Some banks also choose to implement their own specifications without following closely any of those already published. In engineering, a standard is usually something that emerges through the best practices of an industry, it is not something that can be thought off entirely before it is actually used. At Ibanity, we are convinced that fragmentation will be a reality and several formats and specifications will co-exist on the market for some time. Looking at them from a pure software engineering point of view, we can say that those that seem the closest to what TPPs are actually expecting in terms of API quality are the specifications from the Open Banking Working Group and the Berlin Group. They still need, of course, to be challenged by the market with real use cases.“

The large banks have already started working on being PSD2 compliant and on building for the opening of their banking architecture to the TPPs. However, several small or medium sized banks only started recently on this project.
PSD2 has numerous interdependencies with other regulations (such as GDPR and eIDAS Regulation), promising a complex implementation with multiple stakeholders. For many banks, compliance by 2018 will be a challenge. Moreover there is a strong technology impact, adding to the complexity of the project. The following graphs of a market survey of PWC are a good illustration of the current state of the project with the European banks:

Conclusion

The PSD2 creates challenges. Several topics need to be clarified such as the RTS and the market players need also to agree on common standards for the interfaces. Moreover there are some unclarities in the text.
However, there are solutions in the market to withdraw the hassle for Banks and TPPs. The clock is ticking in the PSD race. Consequently, there is no justifiable reason for any bank to delay starting these projects.

François de Witte – Founder & Senior Consultant at FDW Consult and Senior Expert – Product, Business development and sales manager at Isabel Group

 

[button url=”https://www.treasuryxl.com/community/experts/francois-de-witte/” text=”View expert profile” size=”small” type=”primary” icon=”” external=”1″]

[separator type=”” size=”” icon=””]