Following my well-received blog about the ACPR’s approach to UK payment/e-money institutions applying for authorisation in France as part of their Brexit strategy, it was almost obvious that I should follow this up with consideration of near-neighbours Belgium.
The implementation of MiFID II in January triggered a significant change in the blanket treatment of FX forwards in the UK and, as a result, non-deliverable forwards (NDFs) became regulated products and overnight were reclassified as contracts for difference (CFDs). Any FX brokers that wished to continue offering NDFs were forced to apply to the FCA to obtain the relevant investment firm regulatory permissions in order to continue providing the same range of FX products they had always offered their clients.
With the vast majority of e-money and payment institutions successfully re-authorised, let’s take a look at how the FCA intends to monitor this growing population of firms.
With all the excitement around re-authorisation, the ban on credit card surcharges and the new payment services activities, the less headline grabbing regulatory changes introduced by the second payment services directive (PSD2) have been somewhat overlooked. One of these changes relates to complaint handling.
The third in my trilogy of PSD2 blogs from ‘Inside the Regulator’. However, as we are now entering uncertain and uncharted territory, in terms of firms that failed to submit applications for re-authorisation in time, my insights are more presumptive than previously.
Drawing on my experience of heading up the Payment Services Authorisations Team at the FCA for many years, I spoke last week (http://blog.fscom.co.uk/psd2-a-glimpse-inside-the-regulator) about the FCA’s expectations for authorisations and re-authorisations, and offered some insight into how they might approach the challenges brought about by PSD2. I now explore the risks inherent in firms wishing to ‘upgrade’ their licences, the new entrants under PSD2 and the FCA’s approach to supervision.
Much of our time is, and seems always to have been, spent trying to interpret exactly what the regulations or, more importantly, the Regulator is expecting. A leading question asked by many compliance officers is, 'what do they expect of my company?'. This is often where the compliance consultant comes in.