Overview
- E-money is defined as a store-of-value product with the following characteristics: (i) It is a digital representation of a fiat currency (legal tender); (ii) it is a claim against the provider; (iii) it can be redeemed at face value on demand; and (iv) it is accepted as a means of payment by persons other than the provider. In many contexts, it is also referred to as “mobile money”.
- E-money is often referred to as the ‘first wave’ of digital financial inclusion.
Fraud or other misconduct
Risks | Possible regulatory approaches |
---|---|
| Provider risk management:
Agent risk management:
Transaction authentication:
Liability for fraud:
Consumer education / advice:
|
Platform / technology vulnerability
Risks | Possible regulatory approaches |
---|---|
Although unreliability and vulnerability risks have always existed in the context of e-money systems, the scale of the risks and the potential for loss is rapidly increasing with the rise in e-money accounts and the number and value of transactions. If e-money platforms / systems do not operate as expected or are vulnerable to threats, consumers are at risk of loss, inconvenience / other harms. Types of consumer losses: general inconvenience; time lost; loss of data integrity; uncertainty as to whether transaction has been completed leading to doubling – up of transactions; penalties for example, for late payments; utilities being cut off. |
|
Mistaken transactions
Risks | Possible regulatory approaches | ||
---|---|---|---|
Mistakes in this sense are a human error issue rather than fraud. Mistakes are especially likely with consumers who are new to financial services and not used to using their mobile phones to conduct financial transactions. The potential scale of the risk is of concern as mobile money services expand. Transaction mistakes (for example, wrong account number) may result in misdirected funds which are difficult to recover. It may be caused by users (for example, because of confusing interface) or by agent assisting user. |
|
Provider insolvency or illiquidity
Risks | Possible regulatory approaches |
---|---|
| Require provider to isolate and ring-fence segregated / unencumbered funds equivalent to outstanding balances:
Restrict activities to e-money services See Country Examples Many countries and regions have such requirements, including the European Union, Ghana, Malawi, Malaysia, and Singapore. Require e-money issuers to be in a separate subsidiary / business unit. The subsidiary requirement has been endorsed by the Bank for International Settlements’ Basel Committee on Banking Supervision in 2016. See Country Examples The Philippines provides that non-bank providers may provide e-money services only through a separate entity incorporated exclusively for that purpose. In contrast, Kenya’s National Payment System Regulations provide for a payment service provider to separate its payment services in a separate business unit with a separate management structure and books of account. Require liquidity to be maintained by providers / agents See Country Examples Malaysia’s Guideline on Electronic Money requires issuers to ensure that they have sufficient liquidity for their daily operations. Malawi also requires that e-money service providers ensure that their agents maintain sufficient liquidity to honor cash-out obligations to their customers. Impose initial and on-going capital requirements:
|
E-money is not redeemable for face value
Risks | Possible regulatory approaches |
---|---|
Consumers wanting to redeem their e-money balances may face the unexpected risk of providers withholding a portion of those balances (in addition to fees). | Mandate that providers allow e-money balances funds to be redeemed at face value (sometimes referred to as “par” or equivalent value). See Country Examples This requirement applies in a wide range of jurisdictions, including Afghanistan, the European Union, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, and the Philippines. For example, Malawi’s Payment Systems (E-Money) Regulations provide that e-money must be issued and redeemed in Malawi kwacha as legal tender and redeemed for face or par value. |
Consumers are not provided with adequate information
Risks | Possible regulatory approaches |
---|---|
Disclosure related risks arise from:
Poor up-front disclosure practices lead to:
Limited ongoing account information may mean difficulty in:
Failure to notify changes may mean not aware of: For example, increased fees or intent to withdraw / suspend product.
Disclosure format / language risks Misleading marketing risks: Providers may fail to disclose or may be misleading about key product features, transaction fees, minimum balances, or monetary limitations on usage. | Upfront disclosures:
Ongoing disclosures:
Notice of changes:
|
Unsuitable products
Risks | Possible regulatory approaches |
---|---|
E-money product suitability issues can include:
| Product suitability:
Product design:
|