Live data from Hacker News

The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

cnn.com

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

#41
post #14

How does effect Visa & MasterCard

Coming from a country that has had a modern payments system like this for a while - you generally still use a credit card for anything online or at stores, in an Uber or taxis, but use the real time bank payment system for paying invoices and bills, or buying a car from somebody, or sending $12 to your friend in real time because he paid for your lunch etc.

Re: The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

#42
post #34

I expect banks to start charging a $65 per transaction premium to interface with this system. FedACH, or "direct deposit", costs pennies wholesale [0]. The value proposition of Venmo/Zelle is not just that they're instant, but that the fees are not insane. Compare that to retail banks which charge upwards of $35 for a "next-day ACH". The Fed should impose fee caps to encourage adoption. [0] https://www.frbservices.or…

The real cost to ACH is fraud, not the electronic processing, per se. The faster a payment settles the easier and more profitable fraud becomes as it makes it easier to cash out and run. Low fees, fast transfers, high volume/high value--you only get to pick two of the three. (Okay, maybe that doesn't quite work, but you get the idea.)

I think reversibility/non-immutability is one of the sides of this iron triangle, as Bitcoin currently supports all three you listed, but is a fraud risk because while you can transfer a practically unlimited amount globally for $1 in an hour, there is no “undo”, which is, in various ways, a blessing and a curse.

Re: The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

#43
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPP is on it's way to being really handy, but it still sucks that I have to hack things to force NPP for some payments (ie. CommBank will only use NPP for PayID payments, but banks like Up will use NPP for transfers for a BSB/Account number if the receiving banks supports it, not all banks are fully on the platform yet) The downside is my teenagers can now shake me down for cash remotely

NPP is a joke. There's a limit of $1,000 for transfers. It doesn't always work if you don't use a PayID. Compare that to Faster Payments which easily works with 250k with or without a PayID

If you regularly need to move 250k sums electronically inside the Australian economy, using this kind of mechanism, I'd love to know what you're doing. Only because I am nosy: I cannot conceive of transactions on this level which demand NPP class behaviour.

Re: The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

#45

Good lord, that's an awful name for something like that.

Keep in mind that what the Fed is building will just be a backend service for facilitating instant money transfers, not an end-user product. It will be up to the banks to develop the front-end for their customers to use.

Re: The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

#46
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real cost to ACH is fraud, not the electronic processing, per se. The faster a payment settles the easier and more profitable fraud becomes as it makes it easier to cash out and run. Low fees, fast transfers, high volume/high value--you only get to pick two of the three. (Okay, maybe that doesn't quite work, but you get the idea.)

I'm not exactly an expert on clearing, but isn't the reverse also true? FedACH's 24+ hour turnaround makes a whole slew of scams (e.g. fraudulent cash-in, legit cash-out[1]) possible that wouldn't be with an instantaneous system. [1]: I send you, good samaritan, $500 "by accident" and ask you to return it. You return it, my original transaction never clears, and I'm $500 richer.

That's how check kiting works, and AFAIU banks long ago stopped permitting withdrawal of funds that haven't cleared, unless they have other reasons to trust you or to claw back their money.

Perhaps there still are modern equivalents to kiting. I dunno. But, yeah, in any event fraud is a real problem. It's why we can't have nice things, at least without paying an insurance premium.

Re: The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

#47
post #34

I expect banks to start charging a $65 per transaction premium to interface with this system. FedACH, or "direct deposit", costs pennies wholesale [0]. The value proposition of Venmo/Zelle is not just that they're instant, but that the fees are not insane. Compare that to retail banks which charge upwards of $35 for a "next-day ACH". The Fed should impose fee caps to encourage adoption. [0] https://www.frbservices.or…

The real cost to ACH is fraud, not the electronic processing, per se. The faster a payment settles the easier and more profitable fraud becomes as it makes it easier to cash out and run. Low fees, fast transfers, high volume/high value--you only get to pick two of the three. (Okay, maybe that doesn't quite work, but you get the idea.)

Once upon a time I heard a quote from a PayPal CEO that was something along the lines of "we used to have a lot of competitors, but they all failed because they thought we were all in the business of transferring money. We're actually in the business of fraud prevention."

Re: The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

#48
post #43
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPP is a joke. There's a limit of $1,000 for transfers. It doesn't always work if you don't use a PayID. Compare that to Faster Payments which easily works with 250k with or without a PayID

If you regularly need to move 250k sums electronically inside the Australian economy, using this kind of mechanism, I'd love to know what you're doing. Only because I am nosy: I cannot conceive of transactions on this level which demand NPP class behaviour.

I think the idea is that it is very common to transact in amounts >$1000. Rent, car payment, direct deposit, etc.

Re: The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

#49
post #10
post #2

Some real-time payment infrastructures to compare to: UK - Faster Payments Service (2008) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payments_Service EU - SEPA Instant Credit (2017) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Euro_Payments_Area#SEPA... Australia - New Payments Platform (2018) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Payments_Platform

Also, despite not technically being a governmental operation, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Payments_Interface , from India.

Came here to say this.

UPI is quite revolutionary. Launched in 2016 [0], UPI handles 882.3 million transactions with ~USD 21 billion in transaction value [1], as of July, 2019.

UPI is designed to be a payment utility by National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI). NPCI is not a governmental organisation but is formed by a collective of 56 Indian Banks including 10 core banks [2].

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Payments_Interface [1] - https://www.medianama.com/2019/08/223-upi-transactions-grew-... [2] - https://www.npci.org.in/about-us-background

Re: The Fed is getting into the Real-Time payments business

#50
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPP is on it's way to being really handy, but it still sucks that I have to hack things to force NPP for some payments (ie. CommBank will only use NPP for PayID payments, but banks like Up will use NPP for transfers for a BSB/Account number if the receiving banks supports it, not all banks are fully on the platform yet) The downside is my teenagers can now shake me down for cash remotely

NPP is a joke. There's a limit of $1,000 for transfers. It doesn't always work if you don't use a PayID. Compare that to Faster Payments which easily works with 250k with or without a PayID

> NPP is a joke. There's a limit of $1,000 for transfers. It doesn't always work if you don't use a PayID.

ANZ have a $5000 limit. It's down to the bank to enforce this.

Post reply on HN