| ▲ | diego_moita 5 hours ago |
| TL;DR: this is not Brazilian Pix or Indian UPI. Meh, just another "payment option". These payment systems need network effects, otherwise they just won't matter. Another private provider won't generate these effects. Just look at the list of participants, they're small players in Canada's marketplace. They won't generate net effects. Besides, in times of renewed imperialism it is very crucial that a country has full control of their payment systems. And, at last, they must offer guarantees that there will be no friction and won't be subject to enshitification. So, what Canada needs is a system implemented, enforced and managed by the government, like Brazil's Pix and India's UPI. |
|
| ▲ | dghlsakjg 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > So, what Canada needs is a system implemented, enforced and managed by the government, like Brazil's Pix and India's UPI. Payments Canada is a corporation fully owned by the government and overseen by the Department of Finance. It was formed by an Act of Parliament. Short of rolling it into the department of finance it couldn't be more of a government effort. Also, the small partners are the launch partners. The Big 6 are part of the second phase of rollout in 2027. The projection is that 90% of all canadian bank accounts will be covered in the next year. |
|
| ▲ | lbrito 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Why not? Payments Canada isn't a "private provider" like Interac. This new payments system is also ISO 20022, as is Pix. Although high level, their list of features seems close to Pix: * The real-time clearing and settlement component * The real-time exchange component * Third party exchanges flowing through the clearing and settlement component * Centralized fraud solution https://www.payments.ca/systems-services/payment-systems/rea... |
| |
| ▲ | diego_moita 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > This new payments system is also ISO 20022, as is Pix. This is a good step. But the devil is in the details. And I don't see the details that matter the most: * Network effects: will it be widespread (from city buses to fruit stands)? Compared to UPI and Pix, Interact has a pathetic history of adoption. What sets RTR apart from Interact? * Friction: Will it be instantaneous and free of charge? Can it be used by illiterate persons? QR codes? NFC tags? In Brazil/India those payments systems are used by the most informal of agents: fortune tellers, prostitutes, merchants in crime ridden favelas, ... This is what real mass adoption looks like. | | |
| ▲ | lbrito 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Being from Brazil I'm well aware of the shortcomings of Interac! Its early to say if this new payment system will be "Canada's Pix" or not, but to me it seems that's the direction they're going: - The release statement takes great pains to make it clear the payment system is "instantaneous" or "within a few seconds", unlike Interac
- Same ISO standard as Pix
- Some sort of centralization (they just say "centralized fraud prevention"; I'm assuming that means some sort of BoC coordination. Also: "exchanges flowing through the clearing and settlement component") And most importantly, unlike Interac (a private company), this comes from a quasi-public company with a clear government mandate. | |
| ▲ | id34 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think your two points will, in this case, be a question for the financial institutions and fintechs who jump onboard here. RTR won't be immediately consumer-visible, but if FinTech A starts offering some consumer-facing elements ala UPI/Pix using their newfound access to RTR to bypass the traditional banking system and settle directly, then we get there.
I'd look at this as not a consumer product, but a scaffold that allows consumer products to be built ontop of a new system that should, hopefully, allow an end-run around the stuffy traditional infra that is Canadian banking. | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | post-it 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Payments Canada is a Crown corporation. |
