Karsten Wenzlaff, Advisor
August 26th, 2025
September 15, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Digital Banking And BaaS, Cross Border Payments And FX, Competition And Market Structure

On September 14, 2026, UK-based global payments company Wise launched a Chequing Account in Canada with no monthly fee, Interac e-Transfer support, Canadian account details, pre-authorized debits, debit-card access and multi-currency features. The launch takes Wise further into everyday Canadian financial activity while keeping the cross-border tools that built its original customer base.
The account is available to personal and business customers in Canada. Customers can hold more than 40 currencies, receive money using account details available across 22 currencies and send money to more than 70 countries. Wise converts currencies at the mid-market rate and charges a separate conversion fee that currently starts from 0.19%, depending on the currency and transaction.
Canadian customers can send up to C$25,000 to a supported Interac email address and receive up to C$25,000 per day through Interac Autodeposit. Wise doesn't charge its own fee to receive Autodeposit payments, and the September launch removed the Wise fee for sending CAD to an Interac alias and adding CAD through Interac. Incoming transfers that require a security question and manual acceptance aren't currently supported, and an email registered for Wise Autodeposit can't remain registered for Autodeposit at another financial institution.
Wise also provides Canadian institution, transit and account numbers for electronic deposits and withdrawals. Customers can receive pay, set up pre-authorized debits for recurring bills, spend through a physical or digital debit card and withdraw cash at ATMs. Wise currently charges no withdrawal fee on the first C$100 each month, then C$2.69 plus 2.69% on the amount above C$100, while an ATM operator can charge its own fee.
Group Spend lets customers create a shared balance for expenses such as household bills or trips. Wise's international features are still a key difference. Customers can hold CAD and dozens of other currencies in one account, convert between them and receive money using account details available in 22 currencies.
Wise Payments Canada Inc. is not a Canadian bank. It is registered with the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada as a Money Services Business under registration M15193392 and with the Bank of Canada as a payment service provider under the Retail Payment Activities Act. It also holds a Quebec money services business licence.
Wise keeps customer funds separate from its operating money under Canada's payment-safeguarding rules. For its Chequing Account, Wise says eligible deposits are held in trust at a Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation member institution with customers identified as beneficiaries. Eligible deposits can receive CDIC protection of up to the equivalent of C$100,000 per beneficiary if the member institution fails and the trust-disclosure requirements are satisfied; Wise itself is not a CDIC member.
Foreign-currency balances aren't automatically excluded because CDIC can cover eligible deposits in Canadian or foreign currency. Coverage still depends on the deposit meeting CDIC rules, and balances held for the same customer at the same member institution can be combined when insurance limits are calculated.
Wise also became a Payments Canada member in January 2026 after federal rule changes opened membership to regulated payment service providers. That gives Wise a formal role inside Canada's payments system and makes eligible PSP members able to seek participation in payment systems under the applicable rules. Membership doesn't automatically give Wise direct access to every Canadian payment rail.
Canadian consumers can already choose among traditional banks, digital banks and fintech accounts that cover much of the same daily activity. Wise competes with domestic payment functions and a deep multi-currency product, while using a regulated non-bank structure for the account itself.
Big Six banks: Traditional banks still combine chequing with lending, credit, branches, drafts and direct deposit-taking. RBC Day to Day Banking, for example, has a standard C$4 monthly fee and includes 12 debit transactions plus unlimited Interac e-Transfers. Wise removes the monthly fee and adds much deeper multi-currency functionality, but it doesn't replace the full range of services available through a bank.
Wealthsimple: Wealthsimple has expanded deeper into everyday banking with chequing, payments, direct deposit, cards and other daily money tools. Customer cash is held in trust with CDIC member institutions rather than by Wealthsimple as a bank. Wise has the stronger cross-border proposition through currency holding, foreign account details and international transfers.
KOHO: KOHO combines prepaid-card spending, Interac transfers, Autodeposit and bill payments, with customer funds held through a trust structure designed to qualify for CDIC protection. Its product is centred more heavily on Canadian spending, credit building, rewards and budgeting, while Wise puts international money management at the centre of the account.
EQ Bank: EQ Bank's Personal Account also has no monthly fee and includes unlimited Interac e-Transfers, bill payments, direct deposit and card access. The legal model is different because EQ Bank is a trade name of Equitable Bank, a federally regulated bank and CDIC member that accepts deposits directly. EQ already uses Wise for international transfers, making it both a competitor in everyday banking and a distribution partner for Wise's cross-border capability.
Neo Financial: Neo gained direct Interac e-Transfer access in April 2026 and offers digital chequing functions including Interac transfers, bill payments, pre-authorized debits and card spending. Its focus is more Canadian spending, credit and rewards, while Wise brings a much deeper international money layer.
Wise now covers many of the tasks that keep a chequing account central to a customer's financial life, while adding something most Canadian chequing products don't offer at the same depth: one account built around both domestic use and frequent cross-border money movement.
Canada's regulatory changes give non-bank providers more room to compete for that relationship. RPAA supervision applies operational-risk and safeguarding requirements to payment service providers, while Payments Canada membership brings qualifying fintechs closer to national payment systems. Consumer-driven banking could extend that competition further if customers gain easier ways to connect financial data and services across institutions.
Wise is also giving the launch a physical presence through a temporary pop-up at Toronto Eaton Centre on Level 1 from September 14 through October 11. Customers can register, get product help and participate in launch promotions there, but the location is a Wise promotional and service activation rather than a Canadian bank branch.
Wise can now handle many of the transactions Canadians associate with a primary chequing account while remaining a regulated non-bank provider. How much of the everyday banking relationship can fintechs win before customers care less about whether their main account comes from a bank?
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
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
September 11, 2026 | NCFA Resource | Open Banking And Consumer Driven Finance, Artificial Intelligence And Data, Competition And Market Structure

Understanding Open Banking and Consumer Driven Finance means keeping several things in view at once. Canada has proposed regulations and an implementation program underway, other markets already have years of operating experience, and fintechs are testing products around financial data, identity, credit, payments and decisioning.
The NCFA Open Banking & Consumer-Driven Finance Interactive Intelligence resource brings that material into one interactive environment. It is Canada-led, with international examples and global benchmarks where they help explain market structure, implementation choices and commercial activity.
Readers can learn through a Canadian Open Banking Market Map, 146 learning modules, company intelligence, discussions, innovation themes, global benchmarks or Quick Checks (there's even an NCFA arcade perk for completing modules). There is no required starting point.
The Canadian Open Banking Market Map shows who is participating and where different capabilities fit, helping readers identify competitors, infrastructure providers, potential partners and areas of market activity.
The 146 learning modules break Open Banking and Consumer Driven Finance into smaller topics that can be explored individually or in sequence. Quick Checks let readers test what they understand before continuing, making it easier to get current on a specific issue without working through a long report.
Company intelligence connects firms to market categories, technologies and use cases, while discussions and innovation themes explore where new capabilities are developing and where parts of the ecosystem may already be crowded.
Global benchmarks put Canadian developments in perspective. Australia, the UK, Europe and other jurisdictions have tested different approaches to data access, consumer consent, accreditation, payments and competition. Their experience cannot be copied directly into Canada, but it gives Canadian teams evidence to compare against emerging policy and market choices.
Canada’s detailed operating requirements are still being finalized. Worth nothing that NCFA also offers a separate Open Banking Regulatory Intelligence Guide, a dedicated resource for proposed regulations, implementation requirements and regulatory readiness.
Founders and product teams can see where a product fits before committing time and capital, while banks and credit unions can use the same market view across strategy, product and innovation teams. Investors can trace a market theme into the companies working on it and compare the opportunity with evidence from operating jurisdictions.
Policymakers, advisers and industry organizations can examine what happened after policy choices reached the market without assuming another country’s model belongs in Canada. The practical question is what worked, what did not and which lessons are relevant here.
NCFA’s separate Open Banking In Canada Opportunity Brief goes deeper on commercialization, evidence and product opportunities. Interactive Intelligence is broader, giving readers the market and international context before they narrow in on a specific commercial thesis.
The main strength is a one stop destination to research and learn about Open Banking. They can start with a company, market category, learning topic, international example or innovation question and follow the connections that are relevant to their work. Further, the page will be refreshed periodically to capture key updates and changes.
Data-sharing requirements affect product design, new technical capabilities can create commercial opportunities, and evidence from other markets can challenge assumptions about adoption or competition.
Open Banking Decision Intelligence analysis takes that thinking further by examining what firms can do with permissioned financial data, including credit, fraud detection and financial guidance.
There are limits. Canada’s proposed Consumer Driven Banking Regulations may still change, international examples operate under different legal and competitive conditions, and company intelligence dates quickly in an active market. The resource is designed to be revisited as the market develops and should not replace legal advice, due diligence or primary regulatory sources.
Canada Open Banking And Consumer Driven Banking Rules (proposed Canadian requirements, implementation and regulatory intelligence)
How Canada Started Opening Its Financial Infrastructure (payments, data access and financial infrastructure context)
Canada’s Open Banking Strategy Starts With Trust (consent, fraud, liability and consumer protection)
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
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
Explore and compare companies in Canada’s open banking market by capability, market layer, documented Canadian traction and selected global benchmarks, from financial data and bank infrastructure to payments, business systems and intelligence.
Loading market map…
Learn how open banking and consumer-driven finance work, use Canadian market evidence alongside leading international examples, test key claims, and apply what you learn to product, operating, investment and policy decisions.
Choose A Topic (match it to your product, investment or policy question)
Choose A View
Gain Practical Insight
Start with the decision in front of you. Work through one topic or use the full guide to connect regulation, infrastructure, products, competition, adoption and risk.
Connect customer permission, standards, shared infrastructure, business models and trust.
See what could slow launch, adoption, scale or commercial value.
Compare who pays, who benefits, where margins sit and what evidence is still missing.
Separate announcements from operating evidence, activity from adoption and access from outcomes.
Search the full 146-module guide or narrow it by the perspective most relevant to you.
Search the full guide or narrow the modules by the decision or market question you are working on.
Explore selected current and emerging Open Banking discussions through verified market evidence, competing commercial cases and NCFA insight. Cast your view and compare with the market as participation builds.
Canada’s first phase has to prove that data access can improve real financial tasks before payment initiation arrives.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
The near term opportunity is strongest where better data cuts underwriting time, verification cost or manual work. If those services do not generate repeat use, payment initiation becomes more important to the commercial case.
Canada must decide how much operating evidence it needs before moving from data access into customer authorized payments.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
A staged rollout tied to transaction risk and proven operating performance would let Canada add useful functionality without treating every payment use case the same.
Compliance costs can protect consumers and still become a barrier if they do not reflect the activity and risk of the participant.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
Consent, security, liability and consumer redress need a firm baseline. Other obligations should track the activity, exposure and risk a participant creates. If smaller firms carry costs that do not reduce material risk, the framework can weaken the competition and consumer choice it is meant to support.
Private agreements and industry standards continue to develop while the federal framework remains unsettled.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
Commercial data sharing can keep growing without a settled federal rule. The competitive issue is who controls access terms. Continued uncertainty favours firms with the scale to negotiate bilateral arrangements and absorb repeated integration costs.
The UK has proven demand for Open Banking. The commercial test is whether payment services can fund continued investment without restricting access.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
Paid services make sense when they deliver functionality, service levels or risk controls beyond the baseline. Charging for ordinary access too early can weaken fintech economics and reduce the demand needed to support a durable market.
Australia shows what happens when a mature data right expands faster than the ability to complete customer actions.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
More data can improve advice, comparison and underwriting. Action becomes more valuable when it removes a meaningful customer step. The case for wider authority should be judged against the friction it removes and the additional fraud, consent and liability risk it creates.
The UK now has to decide how standards should be governed once the market is established and commercial interests are stronger.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
Standards need to adapt faster than legislation without giving the largest participants control over market access. Funding, technical administration, consumer representation and statutory enforcement should remain clearly separated.
AI agents can progress from reading financial data to recommending and executing financial actions.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
The key control is authority. Customers need clear limits on what an agent can do, for how much, for whom and for how long. Auditability, revocation and liability become more important as autonomy increases.
Brazil links Open Finance to a high frequency payment system, giving customers an immediate reason to use connected financial services.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
Brazil shows the value of pairing data access with an action customers already understand and use frequently. Canada does not need the same payment model, but its early data services still need to solve problems often enough to create repeat behaviour.
Open finance can improve advice and competition, but every additional data category increases consent, privacy and implementation complexity.
Your View
Vote to reveal NCFA’s take.Thanks for voting. Results will appear as participation builds.
Wider access is most useful when the additional data changes a financial decision or removes customer friction. Scope should follow clear use cases, with common identity, consent and liability controls reducing the cost and risk of expansion.
Explore commercial opportunities in Canadian open banking, consumer-driven finance, data access and financial infrastructure, then assess where new products and business models may be viable.
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
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
September 3, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Digital Banking And BaaS, Regulation And Policy, Payments Infrastructure And Money Movement

On September 3, 2026, Revolut received conditional U.S. bank approval from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency form Revolut Bank US, N.A., a federally chartered national bank headquartered in Stamford, Connecticut. Revolut says it is still working through FDIC, Federal Reserve and final OCC approvals and remains on track for a 2027 launch. U.S. customers cannot open accounts with Revolut Bank US yet.
Revolut already serves U.S. customers, but the regulated banking are with other institutions. Lead Bank supports Revolut's prepaid card accounts and banking services, while Savings Vault funds are held at Cross River Bank. Revolut controls the app and customer experience, but those partner banks hold deposits and perform key regulated functions.
Revolut says the proposed bank would offer loans, credit cards and FDIC insured deposits, alongside access to stablecoins and cryptocurrencies. Its charter application also describes deposits, savings, business credit, payments, remittances and foreign exchange. Some investment and digital asset services could still sit with affiliates or outside providers rather than inside the bank itself.
Revolut has been working toward this for months. It dropped plans to buy a U.S. bank earlier this year and chose to apply for a new national bank instead. The OCC received the Revolut Bank US application on March 4. Conditional approval six months later gets the company much closer to owning the bank behind its U.S. app.
Today, Revolut can build the app, price subscriptions and design much of the customer experience, but it still depends on banks such as Lead Bank and Cross River Bank for core banking functions. That arrangement helped Revolut enter the U.S. without taking on the full cost of becoming a bank, but it also means product changes, deposit economics and parts of the customer relationship depend on outside institutions.
With its own bank, Revolut could keep more of that customer relationship inside the company. Deposits could sit at Revolut Bank US, lending income could stay within the group and the company could build products without asking a partner bank to support every change. Revolut also says direct access to payment networks such as Fedwire and ACH could make transfers faster and cheaper.
The economics become more interesting at Revolut's current size. Its 2025 financial results included US$6.0 billion in revenue, US$1.7 billion in net profit, US$67.5 billion in customer balances and a US$2.9 billion lending portfolio. Revolut now serves more than 80 million customers worldwide and is adding roughly one million customers every 17 days.
The U.S. opportunity is still much less developed than Revolut's business in Europe and some other markets. A bank charter gives the company a chance to compete for deposits, credit and primary banking relationships rather than mainly offering an app connected to somebody else's bank. Revolut has also committed to invest US$500 million in the U.S. over the next few years as it builds the products and operations around that effort.
Conditional OCC approval is a major regulatory step, but it is not permission to open the bank tomorrow. Revolut still needs FDIC approval for deposit insurance, Federal Reserve approvals for its U.S. holding structure and final OCC clearance. The company also has to finish staffing, capitalization, technology, compliance and operational testing before customers can be moved onto the new bank.
Owning a bank also changes the risk Revolut takes on. A partner bank carries much of the regulated balance sheet today. Revolut Bank US would have to manage its own capital, liquidity, credit losses, consumer compliance, BSA and AML controls, cybersecurity, governance and federal examinations.
Lending makes that especially real. A payments app can process money without taking the same credit risk as a bank making personal or business loans. Once Revolut starts lending from its own balance sheet, growth has to be backed by sound underwriting, reserves, collections and enough capital to absorb losses when borrowers struggle.
The company is already building that structure though. Its application calls for a separate U.S. bank board and senior executives responsible for finance, risk, compliance, legal, lending and operations. Revolut says it remains on track for 2027, but the launch date still depends on regulators being satisfied that the bank is ready to operate safely.
Revolut's first Canadian attempt ended very differently. The company launched a limited beta in 2019 and left Canada in 2021 without establishing a domestic bank. The earlier product was much narrower than the banking business Revolut now operates in several markets.
Jan Pilbauer now leads Revolut Canada, and Revolut has described the market as attractive, but there is still no announced launch date or public Canadian bank licence application. A U.S. national bank charter certainly doesn't give Revolut permission to take deposits or operate a bank in Canada.
If Revolut does return, it would arrive as a much larger and more regulated company than the one that left five years ago. It now operates licensed banks in multiple countries, carries a growing lending book and is building local banking operations rather than relying only on cards and foreign exchange. Canada has also changed, with OSFI's streamlined approvals framework giving eligible new entrants a clearer federal application process.
None of that means a Canadian relaunch is close. It does mean the next attempt, if it happens, could look much more like a full digital bank than the limited product Revolut tested here before.
Revolut is now trying to do something large fintechs often avoid for as long as they can it seems. That is to own a regulated bank, the deposits, the lending and more of the customer economics. That can produce more revenue and more control, but it also means the compliance failures, credit losses and funding mistakes belong to Revolut too.
How much more can Revolut earn when it owns the bank behind the app?
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
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
January 27, 2026 | NCFA Resource | Open Banking And Consumer Driven Finance, Risk Compliance And Regtech, Artificial Intelligence And Data

On January 27, 2026, Australia’s Consumer Data Right updated its Third Party Data Sharing Use Cases with practical examples showing how consumers can export financial data, give another person access, send data to another application or direct it into an account they control.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission developed the guidance with input from Treasury. It tackles a straightforward product question. After an accredited provider receives a consumer’s financial data, what can the consumer do with it next?
The answer depends on who initiates the sharing, where the information goes and who controls the destination. Those details affect consent, privacy and the provider’s responsibilities.
The guidance organizes third party sharing into four situations:
Who initiates the sharing is the key distinction. The ACCC says these consumer directed scenarios are unlikely to raise compliance concerns when the consumer makes a clear and informed choice. Downloading data, configuring access or instructing the provider to send information helps establish that the consumer chose the disclosure.
If the provider is making the disclosure itself, the permitted use and disclosure rules apply. The provider needs the authority and consent required under Australia’s Consumer Data Right rules.
That difference becomes concrete in product design. Letting someone download transaction history for personal analysis carries different responsibilities from automatically sending customer information to another company. Giving an accountant controlled access inside an SME finance platform is also different from transmitting the data outside that service.
Where the financial data remains inside the accredited provider’s service, the provider continues to carry the relevant Consumer Data Right obligations. These include privacy safeguards covering data security and the destruction or de-identification of information that is no longer required.
When consumers send their data outside that environment, they need to know how the recipient will handle it. The ACCC says providers should explain that other privacy laws may apply and encourage consumers to review the recipient’s data handling policies.
The same framework can support a single disclosure or recurring sharing for a defined period. The provider must hold the collection and use consents required for the service. Consumer Data Right consent generally lasts for up to 12 months, while some business consumer consents can extend for up to seven years.
Fintech product teams can use these examples when building financial data portability into real services. A personal finance app could let customers export transaction data for their own analysis. An SME platform could give an accountant controlled access to business records. A lending or cash flow application could let customers send selected information into another service they already use.
Compliance and legal teams can review the same features by asking a few direct questions. Who initiated the disclosure? Who controls the destination? Does the information stay inside the accredited service? What consent supports the sharing? Which obligations continue once the data leaves?
Banks and other financial institutions can use the examples to anticipate how customers may expect data portability to work. Consumers are unlikely to organize their behaviour around regulatory terminology. They will want financial information to work with budgeting software, accounting systems, lending applications, analytics tools and other services they choose.
Canada will face similar product questions as Consumer Driven Banking reaches implementation. Canada Open Banking And Consumer Driven Banking Rules tracks accreditation, authentication, consent, data sharing, security and liability requirements. Australia’s examples show what product teams have to consider after the first regulated transfer, when a customer wants to reuse the information somewhere else.
Standardized financial data can support credit assessment, fraud detection, cash flow analysis and financial guidance as well. NCFA’s Open Banking Decision Intelligence looks at how firms can turn permissioned financial data into better decisions. Third party sharing gives consumers and businesses more control over which tools can participate in those workflows.
The four examples are specific enough to use in product and compliance discussions. Teams can look at an export button, an accountant access feature, an application-to-application transfer or recurring sharing arrangement and ask exactly who controls the data at each point.
The guidance also shows why interface design and compliance cannot be separated. A button that lets the consumer choose where information goes can create a different regulatory position from a service that sends the same information on its own. Consent, control of the destination and whether the provider continues to hold the data all affect the answer.
That's useful context for Canadian teams working through consent and downstream data use. Canada can define who participates in regulated sharing and how financial institutions transfer data to accredited recipients. Customers will still want to download that information, share it with professionals, use it in another application or authorize access over time.
Australia’s rules do not determine what Canadian firms can do. The two countries have different legislation, privacy requirements, accreditation models and regulatory terminology. The Australian examples are useful because they expose practical questions Canadian product, compliance and policy teams will also have to answer.
The ACCC also makes clear that the article is general guidance. Whether a particular implementation complies with Australia’s Consumer Data Right depends on the circumstances, and providers remain responsible for assessing their legal obligations.
Consumer Data Right (Australian framework, participants and consumer information)
Legal Obligations For Data Recipients (collection, consent, use and disclosure requirements)
CDR Privacy Safeguard Guidelines (privacy requirements for handling consumer financial data)
Canada’s Open Banking Strategy Starts With Trust (consent, fraud, liability and consumer protection in Canada)
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 28, 2026 | NCFA Insight | Open Banking Open Finance And Data Sharing, Digital Identity And Trust, Risk Compliance And Regtech, Cybersecurity And Fraud

On August 26, 2026, Canada’s Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) called for five changes to Canada’s proposed Consumer-Driven Banking Regulations including what financial data can be shared, what firms must prove before accreditation, when public data can be reused without consent, how security keeps pace with new threats, and how the Bank of Canada and Privacy Commissioner coordinate oversight.
The submission arrived on the last day of the government's 60-day consultation, which closed August 26. Finance Canada now has to decide which recommendations make it into the final regulations before Canada's open banking system starts moving from rulemaking into accreditation and implementation.
The Commissioner supports consumer-directed data sharing, multi-factor authentication and mandatory breach reporting to the Bank of Canada. The five requested changes go further and could affect compliance costs, product design, consumer trust and which fintechs can afford to participate.
The proposed regulations cover identity information, account identifiers, fees and terms, balances, transactions and information about financial products. The OPC says those categories aren't detailed enough for consumers to know exactly what information they are agreeing to share and points to Australia’s Consumer Data Right as a more precise model.
It's important when someone is looking at a consent screen. "Identity data" doesn't tell a customer whether a provider will receive a name, address, email, phone number or other information.
The issue becomes more important as firms combine bank data with other sources and use it for credit, fraud, pricing or financial recommendations. Open banking decision intelligence becomes more valuable as firms infer more from permissioned financial data, which makes precision about what was actually shared even more important.
If Canada wants meaningful consent, people need to know what is leaving their bank before they approve it.
The proposed rules offer four accreditation routes under Bank of Canada oversight, including streamlined treatment for payment service providers already registered under the Retail Payment Activities Act. The OPC wants stronger proof from some applicants, including evidence that security controls are working, technical standards are being met and authentication and complaint processes are ready.
It also wants certain financial institutions to show that people responsible for consumer-driven banking have been assessed for good character and integrity, and that insurance or other guarantees are available to manage data-related risks.
That raises the accreditation bar for good reason. Accredited firms may receive account identifiers, balances, transaction histories and other highly sensitive information. The commercial question now is how much proof Canada requires and what it costs credible firms to provide it.
Finance Canada estimates the proposed regulations will generate C$13.2 billion in benefits over ten years while adding about C$457.7 million in regulatory costs. Under the government's central scenario, roughly 680 businesses participate initially, including 578 small businesses, with an estimated average annualized regulatory cost of C$89,133 for each small business.
Large financial institutions can spread fixed security, legal and reporting costs across millions of customers. Smaller fintechs can't. Canada needs to keep poorly prepared firms away from consumer financial data without making the cost of proving readiness another advantage for incumbents.
The OPC also wants Finance Canada to narrow an exception that allows some publicly available information to be used without consent. Its recommendation is that public data should not include information where a consumer still has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Information can technically be public without someone expecting it to be collected, combined with financial records and reused inside a commercial service. Open banking makes those combinations easier and potentially more valuable.
The final rules therefore need to protect against a consent loophole where one piece of public information becomes a reason to use financial information in ways the customer didn't reasonably expect.
The proposed regulations already require vulnerability management, authentication, encryption, network protection, employee training and tested incident-response plans, with those controls applied in proportion to the sensitivity of the data. The OPC wants an additional obligation requiring firms to keep those safeguards appropriate as technology and cyber risks evolve.
That's certainly more demanding than completing a checklist once. After a breach, a firm could still have to show that its security was appropriate for the data it held and the risks it should reasonably have been managing.
For banks and fintechs, security readiness therefore becomes an ongoing operating requirement. Canada's proposed open banking requirements already span accreditation, authentication, security, technical standards, liability, complaints and Bank of Canada supervision. Companies preparing to participate need proof that those controls actually work, not just policies saying they exist.
The Bank of Canada will supervise consumer-driven banking participants while the Privacy Commissioner continues to oversee federal private-sector privacy obligations. A serious data breach can involve both, so the OPC wants explicit authority for the regulators to coordinate their work and share information where necessary.
Without that, companies can face overlapping requests and investigations while an important issue still falls between mandates. When customer data is exposed, management needs to know who must be notified, what each regulator expects and how the two authorities will divide the work.
Clear coordination is especially important because Canada is trying to replace a system millions of people already use. Finance Canada estimates roughly nine million Canadians currently rely on financial-data services using credential-based screen scraping. Regulated API access should reduce important security and liability risks, but only if supervision works cleanly when something goes wrong.
The OPC is asking Finance Canada to be more precise about what data moves, who can receive it and what firms must prove before they get access. Those protections however cost money. Independent security work, technical compliance, authentication, insurance, reporting and complaint processes all consume capital that a younger company could otherwise spend on product development, hiring or customer acquisition.
The answer isn't weaker safeguards. Financial transaction data is too sensitive for that. The challenge is to determine whether each requirement addresses a real risk and whether the cost is proportionate to the firm, activity and data involved.
Canada's C$13.2 billion benefit estimate assumes firms enter the market and build services people want to use. Open banking opportunities in Canada already span verification, cash-flow tools, SME services, financial management and future payment initiation, but APIs alone won't create competition.
Consumers need providers they trust, and credible challengers need a realistic way to qualify. The final rules will help decide both.
How high can Canada raise the privacy and security bar for open banking before the cost of clearing it starts protecting incumbents from the competition the system is supposed to create?
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
The Privacy Commissioner wants clearer rules in five areas: exactly what financial data can be shared, what firms must prove before accreditation, when publicly available data can be used without consent, how security safeguards should keep pace with changing threats, and how the Bank of Canada and Privacy Commissioner coordinate oversight.
No. The 60-day consultation on the proposed Consumer-Driven Banking Regulations closed on August 26, 2026. Finance Canada now has to decide what changes to make before the regulations are finalized.
Yes. Stronger accreditation, security, insurance and compliance requirements can improve consumer trust and keep poorly prepared firms out, but they also raise the cost of participation. The challenge is setting a high enough bar to protect financial data without making open banking too expensive for credible smaller fintechs to enter.
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |