EMA publications

The EMA frequently responds to government and European consultations on regulation that impacts the e-money and payment services industry. Sometimes, we also express our views on issues that are raised in the public domain where we feel it is important to provide an industry input.

Our publications reflect the views of the EMA as whole; individual members’ views may vary from time to time. The public consultation responses are listed below. For further information on these positions, please contact us.

PSD2 Exemptions

The current PSD sets out ‘negative scope’ provisions that list a range of services that would be considered out of scope of payments regulation. Many of these followed pre-existing legal and commercial practice, while others simply draw a distinction between electronic and paper based payment products.

Three of these exemptions have been much used by new payment service providers, and all have been amended in some way by PSD2 in response to competing business and regulatory policy objectives.

(i) The first and much discussed is the limited network exemption; a demarcation of three circumstances where payments regulation is disproportionate. It exempts from the PSD (and EMD2) payment schemes that are limited by geography, limited by the number of merchants participating or by the range of goods and services for which payments are made. This is a key exemption that exempts staff canteens, book tokens as well as many gift card products. Regulators have however struggled with the interpretation of ‘limited’, and continue to do so. In an effort to contain the size of such schemes PSD2 has introduced ‘very limited’ to one limb and qualified issuers as ‘professional’ in another. More significantly however, notification is now required if the turnover associated with exempt schemes exceed EUR 1m. This is likely to increase regulators’ workload significantly, without necessarily increasing clarity or pan European consistency. A new limb provides products with a specific tax or social purpose such as ‘luncheon vouchers’ with exemption now and these are also free from notification obligations.

(ii) The second exemption relates to commercial agents, and provides for some conditions to be fulfilled. The idea is that where a payment is undertaken to a party acting as commercial agent for another person, then the agent does not provide a payment service; they simply receive the payment on behalf of their principal as payee. This is an important exemption and has been relied upon by bill payment service providers for decades. It also precedes the PSD. Increasing use of this arrangement by e-commerce platforms has however prompted a change limiting its scope of application. PSD2 now prohibits such arrangements where the agent acts for both payer and payee. It is not clear however if the change achieves the intended purpose.

(iii) The third exemption, the ‘IT Operator’ exemption, widely used by mobile network operators to offer premium rate service payments has been relaxed in some ways and restricted in others. It now extends the scope of products that can be purchased under the exemption, from digital goods that are delivered to a device to the purchase of ‘tickets’ and also to charitable donations. Simultaneously however, it introduces transaction and cumulative turnover limits that apply to each subscriber.

The nature of the changes, their impact and interpretation will be another focus of discussion at next week’s EMA Conference.

The article “PSD2 Exemptions” was written by Dr Thaer Sabri, EMA CEO

PSD2 Exemptions Read More »

PSD2 – IT Security Provisions

This is the first time that EU payments legislation has sought to detail IT security requirements. They have generally been part of prudential obligations to maintain good internal controls.

The provisions can be divided into four areas: (i) strong customer authentication, meaning two factor – with a number of exemptions, which are required for most remote interactions including account access, (ii) dynamic linking of the authorisation of each remote transaction with the amount and the payee, (iii) a requirement for PSPs to establish a security risk management and mitigation framework, and to report to the competent authority periodically on such risks and mitigation strategies, and (iv) a requirement to notify competent authorities of major operational or security incidents with an information sharing process that involves the EBA, ECB and host member state competent authorities.

Whilst risk management and incident notification may be part of existing practice, new EBA guidelines are expected to elaborate on these obligations. Strong customer authentication in turn builds on current EBA guidelines on the security of Internet payment, and these would be updated to reflect amended and additional requirements.

The EMA conference next week will bring the EBA, member state regulators, and industry security practitioners together to discuss the impact on different parts of the payments sector.

The article ” PSD2-IT Security Provisions” was written by Dr Thaer Sabri, EMA CEO

PSD2 – IT Security Provisions Read More »

EMA responds to Consultation on Scheme of a proposed Consumer Rights Bill

EMA responds to Consultation on Scheme of a proposed Consumer Rights Bill: 

The Irish government is proposing to update Ireland’s consumer rights law, by bringing existing law into line with the European Union (Consumer Information, Cancellation and Other Rights) Regulations 2013 as well as filling in gaps in consumer protection. They are suggesting in particular new requirements on gift cards and voucher products, including a ban on the use of expiry dates. The EMA’s response argues that:

  • regulated e-money products, including gift cards and vouchers, should not come under the scope of the draft law, as there are already sufficient consumer protections in place under other legislation, such as the Payment Services Directive
  • unregulated gift cards and vouchers should be permitted to continue to have expiry dates, for both commercial reasons and consumer preference. Without the use of expiry dates, many limited network gift card and voucher schemes would cease to operate, removing a valuable customer proposition from the Irish market.

The Department for Competition and Consumer Policy will consider the feedback they receive before announcing any next steps.

[button link=”https://emaprd.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/EMA-Response-to-Consultation-on-Consumer-Rights-Bill.pdf” style=”download” color=”green”]Download the EMA response document (PDF)[/button]

EMA responds to Consultation on Scheme of a proposed Consumer Rights Bill Read More »

EMA responds to the Irish Department of Finance’s consultation on the implementing of the Payment Accounts Directive (PAD)

The EMA has responded to the Irish Department of Finance’s consultation on the implementation of the Payment Accounts Directive (PAD). The EMA supports the aims of the Directive: to improve transparency around fees, facilitate switching between accounts, and ensure access to basic bank accounts. Similar to the response to HMT, the EMA expressed concern about the lack of clarity around the scope of the Directive, and proposed that the scope be more clearly defined. If not, it could bring a wide variety of e-money accounts into the scope unnecessarily, such as prepaid cards or online wallets, which are generally considerably different from bank current accounts in terms of consumer usage and purpose. Read the EMA response.

EMA responds to the Irish Department of Finance’s consultation on the implementing of the Payment Accounts Directive (PAD) Read More »

EMA response to the FCA’s Call for input on regulatory barriers to innovation

The Electronic Money Association (EMA) has responded to the FCA’s Call for input on the regulatory barriers to innovation, as EMA members have long had to grapple with regulatory features that prevent them either from developing a viable business model, or from growing beyond a certain size.

In this response, the EMA has focused mainly on EU regulation, as it has the greatest impact on our members, many of whom are authorized in the UK or Gibraltar and passport into other EU member states under the Freedom to Provide Services.

Read EMA response to FCA call for input on regulatory barriers to innovation.

EMA response to the FCA’s Call for input on regulatory barriers to innovation Read More »

EMA responds to HMT CP on Interchange Fee Regulation

On 27 July, HM Treasury published a consultation on the application of the Interchange Fee Regulation in the UK, asking for feedback on their proposals on credit and debit card caps, a time-limited exemption from the rules for three-party schemes, and the regulatory structure. The EMA’s response to each question is below:

  • Credit cards: The EMA agrees with HMT’s plans to apply the same cap on interchange fees as set out in the regulation (i.e. maximum of 0.3% per domestic or international transaction).
  • Debit cards: The EMA agrees with HMT’s plans to apply a “weighted average” (i.e. interchange fees cannot exceed more than the equivalent of 0.2% of the annual average transaction value of all domestic debit card transactions within each payment card scheme). However the EMA raises concerns about the uncertainty this may bring for industry, and supports a review of the policy once its impact has been measured and analysed by the PSR.
  • Three-party schemes: The EMA agrees with HMT’s proposal to exempt three-party schemes that do not exceed 3% of market share across all card products for the maximum 3 year period permitted under the regulation. 
  • Regulatory oversight: Agrees in principle with HMT’s proposed regulatory regime of splitting regulatory responsibilities between the PSR, the FCA, and the Trading Standards Institute. However the EMA raises concerns about the potential for duplication of effort for firms, and calls for guidance for firms setting out the remit and jurisdiction of each regulator.

 

[button link=”https://emaprd.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/EMA-Response-to-HMT-Interchange-Fee-Consultation.pdf” style=”download” color=”green”]Download the full response (PDF)[/button]

EMA responds to HMT CP on Interchange Fee Regulation Read More »

Response to Slovenian Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Act

On 27th July, the Slovenian Office for Money Laundering Prevention from the Ministry of Finance published a new draft of their Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Act (ZPPDFT) to bring it in line with 4MLD. The EMA’s response raises 4 issues with the draft:

  • The draft scope of the Act extends to credit institutions, payment institutions and electronic money institutions passporting into Slovenia on a cross-border basis under Freedom of Services, and should be limited to those authorised in Slovenia or operating in Slovenia under the Freedom of Establishment only; 
  • The translation of the term “payment instrument” as “electronic medium” is legally unclear, potentially narrowing the e-money exemption from CDD, so the original EU translation should be used
  • The draft has incorrectly transposed the e-money CDD exemption by requiring EMIs providing reloadable cards that can be used outside of Slovenia to conduct CDD, regardless of any limits on the amount.
  • The current draft translation of the redemption provision under the e-money exemption from CDD doesn’t permit redemption transfers over €100 to a bank account to be exempt from CDD, so should be amended.

[button link=”https://emaprd.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/EMA-Response-to-Slovenian-Ministry-of-Finance-on-Draft-ZPPDFT.pdf” style=”download” color=”green”]Download full response (PDF)[/button]

Response to Slovenian Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Act Read More »

HM Treasury’s consultation on the implementation of the EU Payment Accounts Directive (PAD)

The EMA has responded to HM Treasury’s consultation on the implementation of the EU Payment Accounts Directive (PAD).The EMA supports the aims of the Directive: to improve transparency around fees, facilitate switching between accounts, and ensure access to basic bank accounts. We also support HMT’s proposed approach – to introduce as little disruption as possible to UK firms by aligning the implementing rules with the UK’s existing system. However, the scope of the directive in relation to non-bank payment accounts lacks clarity. As a result it could bring a wide variety of e-money accounts into the scope unnecessarily, such as prepaid cards or online wallets, which are generally considerably different from bank current accounts in terms of consumer usage and purpose. This would lead to significant disruption and cost for UK e-money issuers.

The law implementing PAD is due to be adopted and published by the UK government by 18 September 2016, with certain elements of the requirements applying by early 2018.

[button link=”https://emaprd.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/EMA-response-to-HMT-Consultation-on-PAD.pdf” style=”download” color=”green”]Download the EMA response (PDF)[/button]

HM Treasury’s consultation on the implementation of the EU Payment Accounts Directive (PAD) Read More »