Karsten Wenzlaff, Advisor
August 26th, 2025
August 7, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Artificial Intelligence And Data, Cybersecurity And Fraud, Risk Compliance And Regtech

On August 5, 2026, Meta released Muse Code in beta, a terminal-based coding agent that can plan changes, write code, validate results and divide larger jobs among parallel sub-agents across software repositories.
The timing of the announcement is more interesting than the launch alone. In less than three weeks, Moonshot released the 2.8-trillion-parameter Kimi K3 as an open-weight model built for reasoning and long-horizon coding, OpenAI cut the price of GPT-5.6 Luna by 80%, DeepSeek launched V4-Flash at $0.14 per million input tokens and Alibaba unveiled the 2.4-trillion-parameter Qwen3.8-Max.
Coding agents are taking on more of the engineering job while the models underneath them are getting cheaper and easier to mix and match.
For fintechs and financial institutions, that makes the buying decision less about which model tops a benchmark and more about what useful work gets completed, at what cost and under which controls.
| Date | Development | Key Data | What Changed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul. 17 | Kimi K3 | 2.8T parameters; 1M-token context; open weights | Moonshot added a very large open-weight option designed for advanced reasoning and long-horizon coding. |
| Jul. 30 | OpenAI GPT-5.6 Luna | Input cut from $1.00 to $0.20/M; output from $6.00 to $1.20/M | OpenAI cut Luna pricing 80% as business customers pushed harder on AI costs and lower-cost competition intensified. |
| Aug. 3 | DeepSeek V4-Flash | $0.14/M input; $0.28/M output; about $0.03 average benchmark-test cost | DeepSeek pushed the price floor sharply lower, although its overall intelligence score remains below the strongest frontier models. |
| Aug. 3 | Qwen3.8-Max | 2.4T parameters; 1M-token context; 95B parameters active per request | Alibaba expanded the open-weight option for large-context and agentic workloads while using a mixture-of-experts design to reduce compute requirements per request. |
| Aug. 5 | Meta Muse Code | $1.25/M input; $4.25/M output | Meta entered long-running agentic coding with parallel sub-agents and a persistent activity log. |
The price cuts do not mean every engineering job is suddenly cheap. Agentic work can consume substantially more compute because agents inspect repositories, call tools, run tests, retry failed work and sometimes launch other agents.
Cursor has already changed its pricing around that reality. It says a difficult agent request can consume an order of magnitude more tokens than a simple request, such as a syntax question. In June, Cursor also introduced a $120 monthly Premium team seat with five times the included usage of its $40 Standard seat and added stronger spend alerts for administrators.
That makes cost per million tokens a weak buying metric on its own. A fintech should care more about the cost of a completed engineering task after model calls, retries, testing and developer review.
Another important change is that choosing a coding environment no longer always means committing to one model provider.
Qwen Code is an open-source terminal agent that supports OpenAI-, Anthropic- and Gemini-compatible APIs, Alibaba Cloud, other providers and bring-your-own API keys. GitHub Copilot and Cursor also offer access to multiple models inside their development environments.
That creates two buying decisions. Which agent should work with the codebase, and which model should do the reasoning underneath it. A financial firm could use one managed development interface while selecting different models for cost, capability or internal risk requirements.
Open-weight does not mean free. The firm still has to pay to run the model or provide the computing infrastructure, monitoring and security needed to operate it itself. Commercial terms are also evolving. Alibaba is reportedly preparing revenue-sharing requirements for some large commercial users of Qwen3.8-Max, following a similar approach used by Moonshot for Kimi K3.
Codex and Claude Code are already competing for larger repository-level assignments. Meta now joins a field where workflow, model choice, governance and billing can matter as much as raw coding performance.
| Platform | Current Cost | Model Choice | Enterprise Difference | Best Fit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GitHub Copilot | Business $19/user/mo; Enterprise $39 | Broad model catalogue | Cloud agent, code review, access and budget controls, governance, IP indemnity and pooled AI credits | Banks and fintechs already standardized on GitHub and Microsoft development workflows |
| Claude Code | Pay-as-you-go for Team and Enterprise through Anthropic Console | Anthropic models | Filesystem and network sandboxing; Enterprise adds SSO, SCIM, fine-grained permissions and audit logs | Complex delegated work where containment and access controls carry more weight |
| OpenAI Codex | Included with ChatGPT Business at $20/user/mo annually; extra usage is token-linked through credits | OpenAI models | Business workspace controls, budgeting, SAML SSO, MFA and no training on business data by default | Teams already using OpenAI across engineering and business workflows |
| Cursor | Teams Standard $40/user/mo; Premium $120 | Multiple frontier and first-party models | AI-native editor, cloud agents, usage pools and spend controls | Engineering-led fintechs willing to make AI central to the development environment |
| Amazon Q Developer | Pro $19/user/mo | AWS-managed models | IDE and CLI agents, IAM Identity Center support, admin dashboards, application transformation and IP indemnity | AWS-heavy financial firms |
| Gemini Code Assist | Standard about $19/user/mo annually; Enterprise about $45 | Google models | Agent mode and Gemini CLI; Enterprise adds private code customization and higher agent usage | Google Cloud development environments |
| Meta Muse Code | $1.25/M input; $4.25/M output in beta | Muse Spark 1.2 | Large-repository work, parallel sub-agents and persistent task history | Worth testing, but enterprise maturity is still unproven during beta |
| Qwen Code | Open-source agent; provider or infrastructure costs vary | Multi-provider and bring-your-own-model | Separates the coding interface from the model provider and supports sub-agents | Firms prioritizing portability, lower-cost inference or more control over the model layer |
There isn't a universal winner (yet?).
GitHub Copilot has the cleanest operational fit where GitHub already anchors development.
Amazon Q and Gemini Code Assist benefit from existing cloud relationships.
Claude Code and Codex are stronger candidates where teams want to hand over larger engineering assignments.
Cursor asks firms to make AI more central to the development environment.
Muse Code is too new to put in the same enterprise-maturity category. Its price and multi-agent design are competitive.
Meta still has to show how it performs inside real development teams and which administrative controls follow the beta.
Qwen Code offers a different choice. Firms can keep the coding interface more portable and compete the model layer separately, which becomes more valuable when model prices can fall 80% in a matter of weeks.
A coding agent becomes more useful as it gains permission to read repositories, edit files, run commands, call tools and execute tests. Those permissions also increase the consequences of an incorrect instruction, compromised dependency or bad code change.
Anthropic says sandboxing reduced Claude Code permission prompts by 84% in its internal use by giving the agent defined filesystem and network boundaries rather than asking a developer to approve every action.
For financial firms, security and oversight need to be part of the comparison alongside coding quality. That includes who can access the agent, what repositories it can reach, what activity gets logged, how data is handled, whether code is used to train models, what networks it can connect to and how spending is controlled.
The market is changing quickly. Open-weight models are pushing down prices, coding tools can increasingly work with more than one model, and agents are taking on larger jobs that make simple token-price comparisons less useful.
Banks and fintechs should be prudent and practical. How much usable engineering work did the agent complete, what did it cost, how often did a developer need to step in and did the work stay within the firm’s security and approval rules?
As coding agents and models become easier to mix and match, should financial firms standardize on one managed platform or keep the agent, model and infrastructure layers separate so each can compete on capability, cost and control?
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
August 4, 2026 | NCFA Insight | SME Finance And Business Banking, Capital Markets And Market Infrastructure, Public Sector Policy And Industrial Strategy

On July 30, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced that its Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee would reconvene on August 6, 2026. The committee will continue work on public market access and capital formation for smaller companies.
On July 27, 2026, the SEC delivered its 2026 Small Business Forum report to Congress. The annual Forum brings founders, investors, intermediaries and policymakers together to develop and prioritize recommendations. The standing committee continues the work between forums and advises the SEC on rules affecting private companies and smaller public issuers.
The process isn't a fast track to reform. Some recommendations become rules, some need Congress and others return for years without a final answer. But what's really valuable is the public record. A market problem gets an owner, a recommendation, a response and a history that can be checked later.
The combined U.S. record contains 426 recommendations from the Forum between 2012 and 2026 and the committee between 2019 and 2026. That total includes repeated calls for the same reform. Finders and limited capital introduction, for example, appeared 29 times. A proposed federal framework arrived in 2020, but no final order was identified by August 3, 2026. By contrast, a 2019 committee recommendation to raise the Regulation Crowdfunding limit was reflected in the 2020 Regulation Crowdfunding reforms that increased the ceiling to US$5 million and removed investment limits for accredited investors.
Canada's financing files are moving too. The federal government is committing C$1 billion to the Growth VCCI program, while Ontario develops professionally managed funds that could give retail investors access to private assets. Both initiatives can widen the market. Neither creates a standing way to identify the gaps between a financeable company and the investors prepared to back it.
The U.S. hasn't solved small business finance. It has kept company access, investor access and market rules in the same public conversation. Canada has consultations and capable institutions, but no single process currently connects those questions and tracks the response from one review to the next.
Financing policy usually arrives in separate files. One initiative supports venture funds. Another considers retail access to private assets. Regulators review an exemption while economic development agencies provide loans, grants or commercialization support. Companies experience those programs as one market when they have to move from one source of capital to another.
The U.S. Forum keeps more of that system in view. Its 2025 Small Business Forum report connected early capital, accredited investor access, Regulation Crowdfunding, smaller funds, retail access to private markets, secondary trading and the cost of becoming public. Not every proposal deserves approval. Keeping them together shows how one decision affects the rest of the market.
A capable business may begin with customer revenue or a grant, add community or angel capital and later reach strategic, institutional or public investors. NCFA's analysis of who gets access to capital shows why that path is uneven. Geography, networks and investor relationships can determine which businesses get seen before investment merit is even tested.
Managed funds and direct investing serve different markets. Ontario's Long Term Asset Fund Project could give households professionally managed exposure to a diversified portfolio of private assets. Investors still choose the manager rather than the companies. Fees reduce returns, private assets can be hard to value and redemption windows can limit access to cash. The fund may also invest outside Canada or buy existing interests, so retail access doesn't guarantee new financing for Canadian businesses.
Direct equity crowdfunding lets people choose a business and can turn customers or local supporters into investors. The tradeoff is concentrated company risk, less information than a public company provides, possible dilution and little chance to sell for years. Platforms also need enough credible issuers and active investors to cover compliance and operating costs. Canada needs both routes because they serve different investors and finance different companies.
Canada's estimated equity crowdfunding market (NI 45-110) equals only C$5.15 million in 2025. Comparable markets generate between six and thirteen times more funding relative to their business base.
Why? Canada's lower issuer ceiling, tighter retail investor limits and divided portal and dealer model don't explain the entire gap. They do restrict how much a company can raise, how much ordinary investors can contribute and whether smaller offerings are economical for intermediaries to support.
Canada would need roughly C$41 million to C$45 million more of annual activity to match Australia after adjusting for the number of people or employer businesses in each country. That is about eight to nine times Canada's estimated 2025 market.
The United Kingdom provides a useful scale check, but not a perfect annual match. Its broader equity crowdfunding market raised £324 million across 297 rounds in 2024, or about C$567 million at the Bank of Canada's 2024 average exchange rate. The year and reporting method differ from the Canadian, U.S. and Australian figures, so the UK number is directional. It still shows how small Canada's investment crowdfunding retail market remains.
The jobs record is less complete. Crowdfund Capital Advisors estimates that U.S. Regulation Crowdfunding has financed more than 8,100 companies since 2016 and created or supported over 430,000 direct and indirect jobs. It also estimates more than US$27.1 billion in economic activity. Those are industry estimates, not official SEC statistics.
An earlier British Business Bank study of successful UK raises found that 39% of companies hired an average of 2.2 employees after raising equity or debt crowdfunding. Another 48% intended to hire. Within three months, 28% had completed angel or venture financing and 43% were in discussions with institutional investors. The study is from 2015 and combines equity and debt models, so it describes company results rather than a current national total.
Australia's 2025 report says 25% of successful offers came from companies returning for another raise, but it does not provide a national jobs figure. Canada doesn't publish an equivalent job or later financing series either. The missing comparison is part of the problem, not a reason to invent one.
An NCFA base scenario starts with about 25 additional equity crowdfunding issuers a year and a direct retail market of roughly C$25 million. That would still reach only 56% to 61% of activity in Australia after adjusting its market to Canadian scale.
If those raises connect to offering memorandum, accredited investor, community and strategic capital, the scenario supports about 50 additional companies and C$50 million of annual financing. It could support roughly 500 existing jobs, create or retain about 150 direct jobs over two to three years and help around eight companies reach another financing.
Growth VCCI is a serious capital supply intervention. Budget 2025 committed C$1 billion beginning in 2026 to 2027. The current design allocates C$700 million to funds of funds, C$200 million to life sciences investment and C$100 million to emerging managers. Ottawa expects the funds of funds stream to attract three private dollars for each public dollar.
That can strengthen professional fund management and support high growth companies that match a fund's strategy. However, Growth VCCI does not invest directly in companies. Fund managers will still choose businesses that fit their ownership targets, time horizons and return requirements.
Some financeable companies will not fit a VC model. The examples below aren't failed venture deals. They are different financing jobs.
Recent Canadian offerings show what direct investing can deliver and where the current regulatory design constrains it. Leading investment crowdfunding platform FrontFundr reported that:
Edison Motors raised C$1.49 million from 961 investors under NI 45-110, reaching 99% of Canada's C$1.5 million annual issuer ceiling.
Blossom came nearly as close, raising C$1.45 million from 951 investors through the exemption and another C$482,619 from accredited investors.
Gander raised C$1.15 million under NI 45-110 and combined it with other investment to reach just over C$2 million.
These companies attracted hundreds of investors, but the exemption limited how much they could raise through that channel. Companies seeking more capital had to add accredited investors or use another financing route. FrontFundr's 2025 investment crowdfunding activity places these offerings within the wider Canadian market.
Edison also shows that progression can work. After reaching the startup crowdfunding ceiling, the company continued with accredited investors and an offering memorandum. It reported approximately C$14 million raised by May 2026. The next question is how often other companies make that transition, what it costs and where they stall. Canada doesn't publish enough company funding lifecycle data to answer it.
The most transferable U.S. lesson is the public chain from market problem to government response. In 2024, the SEC advisory committee recommended raising the Regulation Crowdfunding threshold that triggers reviewed financial statements from US$124,000 to US$350,000. The proposal hasn't become a final rule, but the recommendation, rationale and response remain visible.
Canada could build the same discipline around four connected reforms.
An annual Small Business Capital Formation Forum could set the priorities. A standing committee could continue the work between forums. Founders, angels, retail investors, venture managers, exempt market dealers, platforms, Indigenous and community finance leaders, regulators and economic development bodies should all have seats. No single group sees the full market.
The output should stay short. Publish each recommendation, the problem it addresses, the body responsible for responding, its current status and the next review date. Keep the archive public. An unresolved proposal shouldn't disappear into a consultation file and return five years later as if the problem were new.
The U.S. lesson is the discipline of keeping unresolved capital problems visible until someone responds. Canada already has venture programs, managed private market proposals, exemptions, portals and dealers. A national forum would bring those routes into one public review and show which companies each one serves, where financing stops and who is responsible for addressing the gap.
Growth VCCI can strengthen institutional venture capital. Managed funds can widen retail access to private markets. Direct investing can reach companies outside fund mandates and let Canadians choose which businesses they back. Canada should evaluate these routes as one capital market and judge them by a practical result: whether more financeable businesses can reach investors on workable terms.
If Canada can publish a billion dollar plan for venture capital, should it also publish the financing barriers founders and investors want fixed, who owns each response and what changed?
Continue into the Canadian funding, investor access and intermediary developments most closely connected to this proposal.
It brings market participants together to develop and rank recommendations on small business capital formation. The SEC publishes the leading recommendations in a report to Congress and includes a response to each one.
The Forum is an annual public process. The Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee meets during the year and gives the SEC ongoing advice about rules affecting private companies and smaller public issuers.
FrontFundr reported C$4.79 million under NI 45-110 in 2025 and a 93% market share. That implies a total market of about C$5.15 million, although Canada does not publish a regulator confirmed national total. The estimate equals roughly C$0.12 per person, compared with C$1.08 in Australia and C$0.85 in the United States on the annual measures used in this article.
U.S. industry research estimates that Regulation Crowdfunding has created or supported more than 430,000 direct and indirect jobs since 2016. Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia do not publish directly comparable national job totals in the market sources used here. NCFA's Canadian figures are a planning scenario, not observed results or a forecast.
Under NI 45-110, an eligible company can raise up to C$1.5 million during a 12-month period. An investor can put C$2,500 into one offering, or up to C$10,000 when a registered dealer determines the investment is suitable.
No. It would give regulators and other responsible bodies a recurring public record of market problems and prioritized recommendations. The bodies with legal authority would still decide whether and how to act.
This article is provided for informational purposes and does not constitute investment, financial or legal advice. Programme designs, securities rules and market data may change. Readers should confirm current requirements with the responsible regulator or programme administrator.
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
Aug 3, 2026 | Artificial Intelligence And Data, Banking And Credit, Risk Compliance And Regtech

The financial technology industry is changing as users expect quick responses, services tailored to their needs and smooth digital interactions. Artificial intelligence in CRM software is helping these companies improve how they interact with users - this technology is able to analyze data, automate interactions and provide detailed information about user requirements. When businesses combine management tools with artificial intelligence, they are able to create communication strategies that are more efficient plus build more stable relationships with users.
Fintech companies manage large quantities of information from transactions, account activity and digital interactions. The best CRM software helps these organizations organize and evaluate this information - identifying patterns. Businesses are able to use automated systems instead of manual reviews to understand user preferences but also create experiences that are more relevant.
Advanced platforms allow financial service providers to create profiles that show communication history, financial behaviors and service preferences - this information is useful for teams to provide specific support and make better decisions. When businesses have a clear understanding of their users, they are able to offer services that match individual requirements.
Personalization is a significant part of engagement because users expect services that match their specific situations. Solutions using artificial intelligence are able to analyze interactions as well as recommend products or services based on data - this allows companies to move away from general messages and provide communication that is more useful.
Systems are also able to help businesses predict what a user needs before a problem occurs. As an example, a platform is able to identify changes in behavior so that financial teams provide information at the correct time - this method is proactive and increases satisfaction.
Support is a primary area where artificial intelligence is changing how companies interact with users. Automated chat tools, intelligent response systems or the integration of data allow companies to provide assistance more quickly - these technologies are able to answer frequent questions so that support teams are able to focus on more difficult concerns.
Platforms also give representatives access to important information during a conversation - this reduces the need for users to repeat their details and allows employees to provide solutions that are more effective. A support process that is efficient is able to improve trust and strengthen long term relationships.
Fintech companies require accurate information to make decisions about products next to marketing. AI CRM provides analytics that help businesses understand trends and evaluate strategies - these details allow organizations to identify areas for improvement and change their services based on how users behave.
Selecting the most appropriate software requires an evaluation of features like automation plus data analysis. Businesses are in need of solutions that handle financial data securely. Artificial intelligence is able to help companies make informed decisions and improve their general strategies for engagement.
Automation is a useful tool for businesses that want to be more efficient and maintain consistent communication. Platforms are able to automate tasks like follow up messages but also routine notifications - this reduces the amount of administrative work and allows employees to spend more time on activities that require human attention.
Automation is also helpful for maintaining engagement throughout the time a user is with a company. From the initial signup to ongoing support, the systems are able to ensure that users receive communication on time - this consistent interaction helps businesses create experiences that are smoother.
Security is a critical concern because companies manage sensitive financial information. Software is able to assist companies - monitoring interactions, identifying unusual activity and supporting compliance - these features help businesses manage risks while they maintain efficient interactions.
Tools are also able to improve internal visibility - providing records of communications as well as activities - this information is helpful for organizations to remain accountable and respond to regulations. When companies combine management with security features, they are able to create digital experiences that are safer.
Artificial intelligence is changing how fintech companies connect with users - improving personalization and decision making. As digital services expand, businesses that use intelligent solutions are able to understand expectations or provide experiences that are more responsive.
The future of engagement will continue to rely on technologies that combine data analysis with efficient communication - these systems give organizations the ability to build stronger relationships. When companies use these tools, they are able to create experiences for their users that are more reliable and valuable.
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
July 28, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Open Banking Open Finance And Data Sharing, Payments And Money Movement, Competition And Market Structure

On July 28, 2026, Credit Connect reported that UK open banking passed one billion cumulative payments and 100 billion cumulative API calls across the CMA9 banks. Both totals cover more than eight years of activity.
The report directly quotes Open Banking Limited CEO Henk Van Hulle. A matching announcement wasn't available in Open Banking Limited's newsroom when this article was prepared, so the cumulative totals are attributed to Credit Connect.
Open Banking Limited's June performance data also shows what the system's baseline is for a single month. It recorded 2.8055 billion successful API calls, a 99.50% success rate and an average response time of 349 milliseconds. Credit Connect reported that API use rose 4.4% from May and response time improved by 50 milliseconds.
June also produced 40.16 million successful open banking payment initiations. Single domestic payments declined 1.2%, while Variable Recurring Payments increased 6.7%.
The cumulative milestone gets attention, but the monthly numbers say more about the current market. Banks are processing billions of API requests while third party providers initiate more than 40 million payments a month. Open banking now supports regular payment activity alongside account information services.
The figures describe different parts of the system. An API call is a request between an authorized provider and a bank. A payment is a successful payment initiation. Open Banking Limited also reports more than 19 million active user connections, but those connections aren't deduplicated individuals. The same customer may be counted through more than one provider or brand.
Payment use has been building quickly. The FCA's 2025 open banking progress report recorded 53% year over year growth in open banking payments. Variable Recurring Payments accounted for 16% of open banking transactions at that point.
The UK now has a functioning base for account to account payments. Banks supply the required APIs, fintechs build payment services and merchants decide whether the cost and customer experience compare favourably with cards and Direct Debit.
Variable Recurring Payments are relatively new to the UK market. UK open banking update tracked approximately 3.7 million VRP transactions in March 2025, along with more than 240 regulated third party providers. It also cited a UK Finance estimate that recurring payments could save merchants approximately £1.5 billion a year.
The July numbers show continued use while the industry develops commercial VRP beyond transfers between a customer's own accounts. Customers can authorize businesses to initiate repeat payments within agreed limits without approving every transaction separately.
On June 2, 2026, the FCA supported the launch of the UK Payments Initiative, an industry operated scheme for commercial Variable Recurring Payments. The FCA expects other commercial schemes to compete with it.
The initiative has substantial industry backing. In 2025, 31 participating firms, including banks, fintechs and payment providers, agreed to fund the initial operator. Proposed uses cover utilities, rail, government agencies, charities and regulated financial services.
The remaining question is how the economics are divided. Banks incur costs to provide premium APIs, while payment providers need pricing low enough to compete for merchants. In January 2026, the FCA and Payment Systems Regulator said they wouldn't prioritize a competition investigation into the proposed centralized access fee model at that stage.
The one billion payment total gives the industry a larger customer base on which to build. It doesn't determine who captures the revenue. Banks may charge for premium access, payment firms may win merchant distribution and software platforms may package recurring payments into billing, treasury and account management products.
The original open banking system was built around a market competition order applied to nine large banks. Commercial schemes now bring more providers, products, pricing agreements and customer relationships into the system.
The FCA expects a new Future Entity to set common API standards, monitor performance, oversee certification and support commercial schemes. Its role will influence whether payment providers receive consistent access across participating banks.
The UK payments playbook connects commercial VRP delivery with retail payment rules, Faster Payments improvements and the future regulatory structure for open banking.
Reliability is already measurable. June's weighted API availability reached 99.80%, while successful calls reached 99.50%. Those averages are interesting, although a customer experiences the individual bank connection used for a particular service or payment.
Fraud still remains part of the operating model. Open Banking Limited's fraud monitor found that roughly one in 6,000 open banking payments was fraudulent in 2025, compared with one in 2,500 across the wider payments industry. Authorized push payment fraud accounted for more than two thirds of reported open banking fraud cases.
The direct Canadian relevance is the connection between data access and payments. Canada is developing consumer driven banking, payment system participation and future write access through separate rules and institutions. The UK experience shows where those files eventually meet through commercial pricing, recurring payment permissions, technical standards, liability and scheme governance.
As commercial VRP expands, who should control access pricing and liability when banks, fintechs and merchants all depend on the same connection?
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
July 29, 2026 | NCFA Insight | Artificial Intelligence And Data, Public Sector Policy And Industrial Strategy, Banking And Credit

On July 29, 2026, the Bank of Canada released a working staff paper called Monetary Policy in an AI Driven Two Speed Economy raising a difficult possibility. AI could reduce jobs in some industries while the national inflation rate still looks calm.
The authors test this idea using a model with two industries. One adopts AI and needs fewer workers. The other continues operating near its limit. Lower interest rates can encourage spending and support jobs, but the same rate applies across the economy. A cut that helps the first industry can push up prices in the second.
The paper compares two hypothetical cases that produce the same increase in output:
These figures aren't forecasts or advice for the Bank of Canada. They show that replacing work creates a much larger employment challenge for monetary policy than helping workers become more productive.
The authors put the problem plainly:
"The apparent stability is cancellation, not balance."
The paper separates two ways AI can affect work. The first is augmentation, where AI helps someone complete an existing job faster. The second is automation, where software or machines take over tasks that people were paid to perform. Companies will often use both in the same business, but the difference is important.
Even the first case reduces the need for labour in the model's short run. That may sound backwards. If employees become more productive, a company can produce the same amount with fewer hours. Prices and customer demand do not adjust immediately, so new orders do not replace those hours quickly enough. Automation has a larger effect because some tasks leave the workforce altogether.
To restore employment, the model lowers rates enough to increase spending. The larger cut needed after automation also sends more demand into the industry already running near capacity, where businesses respond by raising prices rather than producing much more. That is why the 3.34 point result is more than a larger version of the 1.48 point result. It carries a greater inflation cost.
For founders and investors, two AI projects can produce the same increase in output and still create very different businesses. A company that helps employees handle more customers may increase sales, hiring and margins together. A company that removes whole tasks may improve margins while cutting payroll and reducing demand for certain skills. The headline productivity number doesn't tell you which one is happening.
When AI helps workers produce more, costs and prices can fall in the industries using it. A rate cut may then raise spending and prices elsewhere. The national average can look calm because the price changes cancel each other, even while AI exposed industries are losing jobs.
Automation produces a different result. The larger rate cut raises prices in both industries, so headline inflation reveals more of the strain. The comparison is that the same increase in output can create a different employment and inflation problem depending on whether AI supports paid work or replaces it.
Canada won't experience this evenly. Canada's AI productivity test found that adoption is already much higher in finance and insurance than across the business economy as a whole. Employment, wages, prices and AI use by industry may therefore tell policy makers more than one national average.
The model improves when workers can reach industries that still need them. With easier job transfers, the required rate cut falls from 1.48 to 0.44 percentage points when AI helps workers. It falls from 3.34 to 1.05 points when AI replaces tasks. Retraining, recognized credentials, relocation support and faster hiring between industries can reduce the pressure placed on interest rates.
Investment can produce the opposite result. When money flows quickly into companies automating work, financing and equipment can become more expensive for other businesses. In that model scenario, the required rate cut rises from 3.34 to 4.09 percentage points. An AI investment boom can strengthen the companies buying the technology while adding costs for businesses competing for capital, infrastructure and skilled operators.
Interest rate cuts can also preserve jobs that automation has removed from a company's long term staffing needs. That may delay workers from reaching employers that still need them. Lower rates can buy time, but they can't retrain a worker, recognize a credential or help someone qualify for a growing occupation.
That changes what leaders should measure. Operators need to separate productivity gained through higher sales from savings gained through fewer paid hours. Investors should distinguish growth led margins from payroll led margins. Policy makers need industry level data on AI use, job openings, wages and prices early enough to see whether workers are reaching expanding sectors.
When AI raises output, how much comes from serving more customers and how much comes from removing paid work?
Continue through the Canadian policy, business and financial developments most closely connected to AI productivity and employment.
This article interprets independent Bank of Canada staff research. The paper uses hypothetical model scenarios. It is not an economic forecast, interest rate recommendation or Governing Council position. Information is current to July 29, 2026 and is provided for informational purposes only.
The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, artificial intelligence, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |