Handling Multiple Currencies

The 2026 Worldpay Global Payments Report is out, and it’s a must-read for anyone who wants to understand payments. This is my analysis. 1. Global Overview: • Wallets are the entry point to commerce (56% of e-com and 33% of POS), aggregating cards, A2A, and alternative rails. • Cards are shifting from front-end to infrastructure, still driving 48% of POS and 31% of e-com. • A2A wins when tied to domestic infrastructure - but fragmentation limits global scale. • E-com is growing faster (7.5% CAGR vs 3.4% POS), concentrating future value in digital-native methods in online journeys. 2. Regional Comparison: • Western markets remain card-heavy, while Asia is already operating on alternative rails • A2A remains single-digit globally, but has scaled in LATAM (20%+) and MEA (15%), tied to domestic systems • Growth is skewed to MEA (11%), LATAM (9%), APAC (8.5%) vs. Europe/NA (~6-7%), shifting global share over time 3. POS: From Terminals to Apps: • Payment apps scale faster than the market (8% vs 3.4% CAGR) – to reach 46% of POS by 2030 • APAC has already made the shift (China 89%, India 65%, Thailand 56% POS via apps) • QR codes remove infrastructure dependency, accelerating adoption in APAC and LATAM • Europe is opening up, shifting from a closed card system to a competitive app layer 4. A Multipolar Landscape: • Scale is shifting to domestic networks (UPI, PIX, Alipay), reducing reliance on global card schemes • Cross-border is becoming a connectivity problem, solved by linking local systems (vs. expanding global ones) • Adoption scales regionally first (APAC corridors), not globally, reinforcing fragmentation • Europe is the exception, attempting a unified layer (Wero) instead of connecting existing systems 5. Wallets as the Control Layer: • Wallet funding reflects local payment norms: cards in the West, A2A in markets like India, and local methods in each region • What changes is not the rail, but controls - wallets sit on top and decide how it’s used • As non-card rails grow, wallets become the integration layer, expanding into super apps where payments power broader ecosystems 6. BNPL as a Core Wallet Component: • BNPL is no longer standalone but a standard feature inside wallets and checkout • Shift from transaction monetization to lifecycle ownership, expanding into accounts, cards, and ecosystems • The paradox: instead of replacing cards, BNPL drives installment demand back onto card rails 7. The Crypto Integration: • Still niche in direct use (0.2% of e-com), but growing fast (16% CAGR), with scale coming via fiat-linked flows (vs. native crypto payments) • Adoption through integration, not replacement: cards, wallets and stablecoins bridge crypto into existing rails, especially in x-border and B2B Analysis: Panagiotis Kriaris, source: Worldpay Global Payments Report 2026 𝐒𝐮𝐛𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐲 𝐧𝐞𝐰𝐬𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫: https://lnkd.in/dkqhnxdg

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has released its Updated Recommendations (February 2025), reinforcing international standards on AML, CFT, and Combating the Financing of Proliferation (CFP). Key Highlights: ✅ Risk-Based Approach (RBA) Strengthened • Countries and financial institutions must continuously assess ML/TF risks. • Proliferation financing risks (linked to WMDs) must now be explicitly assessed and mitigated. • Greater emphasis on data-driven decision-making in risk management. ✅ Stronger Financial Crime Enforcement & Asset Recovery • Enhanced measures to identify, freeze, and confiscate illicit assets, even without conviction-based legal proceedings. • Countries must cooperate more effectively on cross-border investigations related to ML, terrorism, and sanctions evasion. • Expanded legal mandates for regulators to seize cryptocurrency-related assets used for illicit activities. ✅ Enhanced Corporate Transparency & Beneficial Ownership Regulations • Stricter disclosure requirements for companies and trusts to prevent anonymous ownership structures facilitating financial crime. • Introduction of centralized registries for beneficial ownership information, accessible by regulators and FIUs. • Bearer shares and nominee shareholder arrangements are further restricted due to their role in obfuscating ownership. ✅ New Standards for Virtual Assets & Emerging Technologies • FATF mandates stronger oversight on VASPs, aligning AML rules for crypto-assets with traditional financial institutions. • New tech-based compliance controls (including AI-driven monitoring) recommended to enhance financial crime detection. • Stricter regulations for cross-border virtual asset transactions to combat illicit financing and crypto-enabled ML. ✅ Expanded Measures Against Terrorist Financing & Sanctions Evasion • Countries must implement targeted financial sanctions to prevent terrorism and WMD proliferation financing. • NPOS are now required to assess their terrorist financing risks while ensuring legitimate operations are not disrupted. • Greater scrutiny on correspondent banking relationships to prevent facilitation of illicit transactions. ✅ Increased International Cooperation & Mutual Legal Assistance • FATF calls for faster cross-border financial intelligence sharing to prevent criminals from exploiting jurisdictional gaps. • Countries must align with UNSCRs on CTF and sanctions enforcement. Recommandations: 🔹 Implement advanced transaction monitoring using AI to detect suspicious financial activities more effectively. 🔹 Reinforce beneficial ownership compliance 🔹 Strengthen cross-border AML/CFT coordination by fostering partnerships between FIs, regulators, and law enforcement agencies. 🔹 Ensure robust oversight on virtual assets by applying FATF’s Travel Rule to cryptocurrency transactions and monitoring DeFi risks. #AML #FATF #FinancialCrime #Compliance #CryptoRegulation

The auditors found a $4.2M discrepancy on day 3 of fieldwork. We thought our intercompany reconciliations were clean. I was supporting year-end close for a tech company with entities across Dubai, Australia, and NZ. Every month, we'd match balances. Sign off. Move on. The Senior Auditor asked a simple question: "Can you show me how this payable in Dubai matches the receivable in your AUD entity?" I pulled the reconciliation. The amounts matched. But the transaction dates were off by 45 days. Then she asked: "What about FX revaluation? You're booking AED, they're booking AUD. Where's the difference sitting?" Silence. We had been matching nominal amounts for 8 months without considering currency movements or timing differences. Here's what I learned: Intercompany reconciliations in the UAE aren't just about matching numbers anymore. With UAE Corporate Tax now in play, every unreconciled difference is potential transfer pricing exposure. Every timing gap is an audit flag. Every FX mismatch is a question the tax authority will ask. We rebuilt the process from scratch. Monthly confirmations. Currency-adjusted matching. Full audit trail. It added 2 days to our close. But it removed the single biggest risk sitting in our financials. What's your biggest intercompany reconciliation challenge right now? #IntercompanyAccounting #UAEFinance #CorporateTax #FinancialReporting #AuditRisk #TransferPricing #GCCFinance

Most teams think payment tracking is a logging problem. It is a ledger problem. A single cross-border payment typically touches four independent systems. A bank for fiat in, a custody provider for stablecoins, an exchange for FX, and a local bank for payout. None share a transaction ID. None understand the full lifecycle This creates a structural blind spot. At low volume, teams manually reconcile. At scale, this breaks. The US–Mexico corridor alone processes over $5B per month. At 1,000 transactions per day, you are no longer tracking payments. You are running forensic accounting in production  ____ The failure shows up in specific places. -> First, compliance. A payment gets paused mid-flow. You cannot answer whether funds are in custody, in review, or already converted. Each system shows a different state. No system shows the truth. -> Second, failed payouts. A wrong account number leaves funds stranded in local currency. Without per-transaction state tracking, you do not know if the money sits in a bank, an exchange, or a holding account. Support becomes investigation. -> Third, FX leakage. You quote a rate at 16.80. Execution happens at 17.05 or 17.20. Without linking quote and execution per transaction, you cannot measure spread, slippage, or actual revenue. Margin disappears silently. -> Fourth, reconciliation. Bank balances, custody balances, and exchange reports should match. They do not. Teams spend days aligning X, Y, and Z across systems, often without a definitive answer. The core issue is that each system records events, not outcomes. The fix is not more integrations but a single timeline. A proper ledger creates one atomic record of the payment lifecycle. The same transaction tracks USD in, USDC movement, FX conversion, and MXN payout. Every step is linked through a single identifier, and every state transition is explicit. That unlocks concrete use cases. You can answer “where is the money” with one query, not four systems. You can measure FX revenue and slippage per transaction, not per month. You can prove to regulators exactly when compliance held and released funds. You can resolve failed payouts instantly by locating funds in holding states. The shift is clear. Moving money is solved, but we still have not solved how to record it. The system that wins is the one that turns fragmented events into a single, auditable narrative. Insights by Formance

Imagine a CFO who runs a large manufacturing company across Five East African markets. She has accounts at four banks, FX exposures across Five currencies, and a team of twenty people whose primary job is reconciliation. She doesn't know her cash position in real time. Nobody does. Her treasury team produces a weekly cash position report, compiled from bank statements, manually reconciled against the ERP, reviewed for errors, then signed off. By the time it reaches her, it is already partially wrong. The report describes a moment that no longer exists. The consequences are not abstract. Companies across the continent have faced regulatory fines for FX violations that were, in hindsight, avoidable. Not because their compliance teams were incompetent, but because the exposure built across multiple accounts, in multiple currencies, over multiple days, and nobody had a consolidated view until it was too late. Now imagine a treasury intelligence layer built on AI-native architecture. Not a dashboard. Not a reporting tool. A system that sits across every account and every currency position, consuming live transaction data rather than stale end-of-day statements. One that can see that your Tanzanian subsidiary is three days from a negative cash position, cross-reference it against your surplus KES balance in Nairobi, and tell you exactly how much to move, when to move it, and which route minimises your tax exposure and FX conversion cost. One that can see that $2.3m is sitting idle across four accounts, not as a buffer, but as uncertainty priced in headcount, and tells you exactly how much of it can be deployed into short-duration instruments without impairing your 30-day obligations. The reconciliation team of twenty doesn't disappear, they just stop spending six days a week producing a report that describes the past, and start managing the exceptions the system has already surfaced. This is the compounding effect that most discussions about AI in banking miss entirely. The CX differential becomes too big to miss. In this example, the CFO relationship stops being a lending relationship with treasury services attached. It becomes an intelligence dependency. Those are structurally different things to price, and structurally different things to walk away from. The banks that build this will find their corporate relationships deepen in ways that pricing alone never could. The ones that don't will keep selling the same treasury product they sold in 2015. 📩 Full analysis on Frontier Fintech — link in the comments. Subscribe for the kind of deep analysis on African fintech that you won't find anywhere else.

What is FX ( Foreign exchange) reconciliation process in investment banking? In investment banking, the FX (Foreign Exchange) reconciliation process is a critical accounting procedure used to ensure the accuracy and consistency of financial records related to currency exchange transactions. It involves comparing internal records with external data sources, such as bank statements or trading platforms, to identify and resolve any discrepancies in trade details, balances, or cash flows. Here's a breakdown of the FX reconciliation process: 1. Data Collection and Matching: Internal Records: Investment banks maintain detailed records of FX transactions, including trade details, currency pairs, amounts, dates, and associated costs. External Data: Banks obtain transaction details and balances from external sources like counterparties (e.g., other banks, brokers), clearinghouses, and custodians. Matching: The core of the reconciliation process involves matching the internal records with the external data, ensuring that the same transactions are recorded and that there are no missing or conflicting details. 2. Discrepancy Identification: Types of Discrepancies: Discrepancies can arise from various sources, including incorrect data entry, timing differences (e.g., trades processed at different times), or settlement issues (e.g., payments not being processed correctly). Examples: This can include differences in the number of units traded, the exchange rate applied, the value of the transaction, or the timing of settlement. 3. Discrepancy Resolution: Investigation: Once discrepancies are identified, they need to be investigated to determine the root cause. Correction: Based on the investigation, the necessary adjustments are made to either the internal records or the external data to ensure consistency. Follow-up: Any identified issues or trends should be addressed to prevent future discrepancies. 4. Importance of FX Reconciliation: Accuracy and Integrity: FX reconciliation ensures the accuracy and integrity of financial reporting by identifying and correcting errors in FX transactions. Risk Management: It helps in identifying and mitigating potential risks associated with FX transactions, such as settlement risk, operational risk, and reputational risk. Compliance: Reconciliation is essential for meeting regulatory requirements and ensuring compliance with financial reporting standards. Operational Efficiency: Accurate reconciliation leads to more efficient operations by reducing the time and effort spent on manual corrections and resolving discrepancies. Transparency and Trust: A robust FX reconciliation process builds trust among all stakeholders, including investors, regulators, and counterparties. 5. Automation: Increasing Automation: Investment banks are increasingly automating the FX reconciliation process using specialized software to improve efficiency and accuracy.

You don’t need to be in Brazil to sell in Brazil. But you do need to solve the FX and reconciliation mess. A few months ago, a Colombian edtech hit a familiar wall. They wanted to launch some of their courses for Brazilian students. Product was solid. Demand wasn’t the problem. The real blocker? Getting paid. PIX is everywhere — but only if you have a local entity. Traditional processors were expensive, slow, and turned reconciliation into a full-time job. The team wanted to focus on product and distribution, not spreadsheets and settlement reports. That’s where Avenia came in. Instead of setting up a Brazilian subsidiary, the edtech integrated Avenia’s API. Now, when a student pays via PIX, the company receives BRLA (a BRL-pegged stablecoin) instantly. Avenia converts it to USDC — all within the same stack — and settles directly to their treasury. Even better: reconciliation is automated. Each payment comes tagged with metadata the company defines. No latency. No FX surprises. No end-of-month chaos. They didn’t change their product. Just their infra. The result? Faster liquidity. Transparent rates. A finance team that can finally breathe. Cross-border payments shouldn’t feel like paperwork from the 90s. They should be as simple — and programmable — as sending a message.

Key update from FATF – October 2025 Plenary Today, the FATF announced major developments at its Plenary (22-24 Oct 2025) that signal important shifts in the global anti-money-laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist-financing (CFT) landscape. Highlights: • Four African jurisdictions – South Africa, Nigeria, Mozambique and Burkina Faso – have been removed from the “Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring” list (aka the “grey list”), after completing their action plans within agreed timeframes. • The FATF adopted new guidance on asset recovery – boosting tools to disrupt and recover the proceeds of crime. • A fresh “Horizon Scan” was approved, flagging emerging risks posed by generative AI, deepfakes and other novel technologies in facilitating illicit finance. • The next round of mutual evaluations is underway; countries such as Belgium and Malaysia are the first to be assessed under the new, more time-bound, risk-based process. Why this matters: For corporate compliance, financial institutions, and regulators, these updates reinforce that AML/CFT is evolving — it’s not just about static regulations, but dynamic risk-management, emerging technologies and cross-border cooperation. The delisting of the four jurisdictions also underscores that meaningful reform does get recognised — which is both encouraging and a signal that the bar is rising globally. On the technology front, the emphasis on AI and deepfakes shows that the financial crime fight is increasingly intertwined with the broader tech ecosystem. Take-aways for practitioners: 1. Review your country-risk assessments and exposures: changes in jurisdiction status may affect your risk-rating matrix and due-diligence frameworks. 2. Integrate asset-recovery considerations into your AML/CFT programme — now more than ever, the focus is shifting from prevention to disruption and recovery. 3. Keep an eye on emerging-tech risks (AI, deepfakes, etc) — ensure your monitoring, alerting and governance frameworks are fit for these new threat vectors. 4. Ensure that your engagements with jurisdictions removed from “increased monitoring” are calibrated accordingly — the regulatory and transactional environment may shift. This is another reminder: vigilance, adaptability and forward-look risk thinking are key. #AML #CFT #FinancialCrime #FATF #Compliance #RiskManagement #Governance #EmergingRisks #AssetRecovery #AntiMoneyLaundering #Deepfakes #Fintech #DueDiligence

𝗩𝗶𝗲𝘁𝗻𝗮𝗺𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿: 𝟭 𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲 Vietnam’s Ministry of Finance issued Circular 99/2025/TT-BTC late last week, representing the most significant overhaul of Vietnam’s accounting regime in more than a decade (maybe ever). This fundamentally changes how enterprises can design internal controls, maintain accounting records, recognise revenue, and prepare financial statements from 1 January 2026. For those of us advising foreign-invested and growing Vietnamese companies, this represents a long-awaited structural policy shift, moving Vietnam closer to VFRS/IFRS alignment, introduces actual flexibility, and transfers more responsibility the companies to document, control, and justify accounting policies. 𝘽𝙞𝙜𝙜𝙚𝙨𝙩 𝘾𝙝𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙚𝙨 • Internal governance becomes mandatory: enterprises are required to formalise internal accounting controls, delegation of authority, and accountability. • Currency flexibility: companies can adopt a foreign currency as their accounting currency (if most transactions are denominated that way), with clearer FX translation rules and less dependence on rigid bank rates. • Chart of Accounts modernised: companies can now customise deeper levels of their COA to match internal management. • Branches no longer need standalone financial statements: head offices consolidate directly and eliminate internal transactions, simplifying multi-entity reporting. • Financial statements: “Balance Sheet” becomes “Statement of Financial Position”, and only annual FS are mandatory unless another law requires interim reporting. • Revenue recognition: now aligned with performance obligations. • Inventory costing flexibility: different costing methods may be applied to different categories (e.g., FIFO for imports, weighted average for local stock). • Electronic vouchers and signatures formally recognised. Timeline Applies for Financial years beginning 1 January 2026. In reality, the transition must happen in 2025 (ie, now): accounting systems, ERP mappings, CoA redesign, internal control policies, and training all need to be in place before year-end. What enterprises should do now >Run a gap assessment vs current CoA, voucher systems and financial reporting. >Update internal governance and control documentation. >Upgrade accounting software / ERP to new templates and reporting structures. >Decide whether foreign-currency accounting is beneficial (and defensible). Prepare parallel 2025 financial statements under Circular 99 formats to ensure smooth adoption. This reform is a real opportunity for organisations: those who treat it strategically (not administratively) will benefit for less wasted compliance time, and simplified head office/offshore reporting. 2026 will arrive quickly, and enterprises that start preparing now will be the ones that turn compliance into competitive advantage. Alitium will be releasing further specific details on Circular 99 in coming days.

Regulations for AML (Anti-Money Laundering) and KYC (Know Your Customer)vary by country but generally follow international guidelines set by organizations like the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Below are key regulations across major jurisdictions: 1. Global Standards - FATF Recommendations– Set international AML/CFT (Countering the Financing of Terrorism) standards. -Basel Committee on Banking Supervision– Provides guidelines for risk management in financial institutions. 2. United States - Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) (1970)– Requires financial institutions to report suspicious activities to FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network). - USA PATRIOT Act (2001)– Strengthened AML regulations, including enhanced due diligence (EDD). - Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) (2020) – Expanded reporting requirements and increased penalties for non-compliance. 3. European Union (EU) - EU Anti-Money Laundering Directives (AMLD 1-6) – Introduced risk-based approaches, beneficial ownership registers, and enhanced transaction monitoring. - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Ensures customer data protection in KYC processes. 4. United Kingdom - Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) (2002)– Criminalizes money laundering and mandates suspicious activity reporting. - Money Laundering Regulations (MLR) (2017, updated in 2022) – Implements EU AML directives post-Brexit. 5. Asia-Pacific - Singapore– The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) enforces AML/KYC rules under the Financial Advisers Act. - Hong Kong– The Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance (AMLO) mandates customer due diligence (CDD). - India – The Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is the primary AML law. 6. Middle East & Africa - UAE – The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) standards are implemented through the Central Bank’s AML/CFT regulations. - South Africa – The Financial Intelligence Centre Act (FICA) mandates KYC compliance. Key AML/KYC Requirements - Customer Due Diligence (CDD)– Identify and verify customers before establishing a business relationship. - Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD) – For high-risk customers, such as politically exposed persons (PEPs). - Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR)– Mandatory reporting of suspicious transactions. - Transaction Monitoring– Continuous monitoring of customer transactions for unusual patterns. #amlkyc #antimoneylaundring #regulatory #fatf #fica #pmla #amlo #mlr #poca #amld #gdpr #sar #edd #cdd #peps