A mid-size alternative lender in Vilnius pulls company registry filings, marketplace pricing and sanctions lists into its underwriting model every night. None of it is illegal to read. Most of it becomes a liability the moment it is copied, stored and combined with something else. That gap between "publicly visible" and "lawfully processed" is where fintech compliance teams keep losing arguments with their own data science departments.
Public web data – company filings, marketplace listings, court dockets, sanctions databases, social media bios – has become a standard input for credit scoring, fraud detection, KYB and competitive pricing in financial services. In Meta Platforms v. Bright Data, a federal district court held that Bright Data had not breached Meta's terms of service by collecting data from logged-out pages, which was the specific conduct at issue. The ruling turned on Bright Data's particular conduct and its contractual relationship with Meta rather than establishing a general rule for scraping public websites. For a regulated entity, that distinction is not academic. A bank's third-party risk team, an EU DORA auditor or a state attorney general does not care whether the data was "technically public" if the collection method itself created exposure.
What "public" actually means under US and EU law
hiQ Labs v. LinkedIn is still the reference case for US practitioners, and it is more nuanced than the headlines from 2019 suggest. The Ninth Circuit held twice, first in 2019 and again on remand in 2022, that scraping data from pages open to any visitor does not amount to accessing a computer "without authorization" under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. That took the CFAA off the table as a criminal exposure for reading public pages. It did not end the case. hiQ and LinkedIn settled the remaining contract claims in 2022, and hiQ agreed to destroy the data it had already collected and pay damages, because its scraping still violated LinkedIn's user agreement. The lesson for a fintech legal team is specific: CFAA risk and contract risk are two separate questions, and winning on one does not close the other.
On the EU side, the CFAA question barely matters, because GDPR does not distinguish between public and private personal data. Article 4 defines personal data by whether it relates to an identifiable natural person, not by where it was found. A LinkedIn bio, a court filing with a defendant's name, or a marketplace seller profile with a real name attached all fall inside GDPR's scope the moment they are collected, and Article 6 still requires a lawful basis – legitimate interest is workable for adverse-media or fraud screening, but it requires a documented balancing test, not just a note in a Confluence page.
Where fintechs actually use this data
Four use cases account for most of the public-data traffic coming out of fintech data engineering teams. Alternative underwriting pulls e-commerce store metrics, invoice marketplaces and gig-platform ratings to score borrowers who lack conventional credit files – Kabbage and, later, Amex built entire product lines on this. AML and sanctions screening cross-references OFAC, EU and UN lists against onboarding data, refreshed daily because list updates are unscheduled. Competitive pricing intelligence in embedded finance and BNPL tracks merchant-facing rates across marketplaces to benchmark interchange and fee structures. Fraud and adverse-media screening checks court records, press mentions and social profiles as a secondary signal alongside device fingerprinting.
Not all four carry the same regulatory weight. The table below is the one compliance teams actually need before greenlighting a collection project, not a generic "data source" taxonomy.
Data source
Typical fintech use
Regulatory sensitivity
Main legal basis to check
Company registries (Companies House, EDGAR, EU BRIS)
KYB, beneficial ownership checks
Low to medium
Public register rules and applicable data protection law; filings may contain personal data of directors, officers, beneficial owners and other natural persons
Sanctions and PEP lists (OFAC, EU, UN)
AML/KYC screening
Low
Government-published, but update frequency and source authenticity matter
Terms of service and contract law; CFAA exposure may be lower for pages accessible without login (per hiQ v. LinkedIn)
Public social media profiles
Alternative credit signals, fraud indicators
Medium to high
GDPR/CCPA personal-data rules apply even if the profile is public
Court records and litigation databases
Adverse media, fraud investigation
High
Jurisdiction-specific rules on re-use of judicial data (varies widely, e.g. France's Article 33)
The technical side: building a collection pipeline that survives an audit
The engineering choices matter as much as the legal analysis, because a regulator or a bank's third-party risk assessor will ask for logs, not intentions. A defensible pipeline has five properties, and they map to concrete infrastructure decisions rather than policy statements.
Figure 1
Figure 1. Each control maps to an artifact a third-party risk assessor can actually inspect. The first four are described below; request logging is the fifth, and the one the practical takeaway returns to.
Rate limiting that respects the source, not just your own throughput budget
Reading a site's robots.txt crawl-delay directive and setting concurrency accordingly is a five-minute engineering task that changes the legal character of the whole program. A crawler hitting a company registry at 200 requests per second looks like a denial-of-service test to the target's security team, regardless of what the data is used for afterward. Most production fintech scrapers we've reviewed cap at 1 request per 2-4 seconds per domain, which keeps CPU load on the target negligible and avoids the WAF triggers that generate abuse complaints in the first place.
IP rotation for reliability, not for evasion
This is the point where proxy infrastructure choice stops being a procurement decision and starts being a compliance decision. Rotating through residential or datacenter IPs to maintain a stable success rate against rate limits is standard engineering practice. Rotating IPs specifically to re-access a source after being blocked for a terms-of-service violation is the fact pattern that turned hiQ's win on CFAA into a loss on contract claims. The distinction sounds semantic until an opposing counsel reconstructs your request logs during discovery.
Data minimization at ingestion, not at export
Filtering personal identifiers (names, emails, phone numbers, biometric-adjacent fields) before the data lands in a warehouse is materially cheaper than filtering it after ten analysts have already queried the raw table. A regex-and-NER pass at the collection layer, logged with a timestamp and a rule version, is the artifact a DPO can actually show an auditor.
Retention limits tied to the original purpose
GDPR's storage limitation principle (Article 5(1)(e)) and most US state privacy laws expect a defined retention period. "We keep everything indefinitely for model retraining" is the single most common finding in the DPIAs we've read for alt-data underwriting programs, and it is usually fixable with a 90-180 day rolling window plus a documented exception process for flagged accounts.
Infrastructure and vendor selection
Proxy and scraping infrastructure choice affects three things a compliance file will ask about: whether the vendor itself runs KYC on IP sourcing, whether the billing model matches your actual usage pattern (per-IP monthly vs. per-GB bandwidth), and whether the vendor's own terms indicate the network is ethically sourced rather than built from compromised devices.
Steady, low-volume monitoring jobs (registry checks, sanctions list refresh) where a fixed, auditable IP per data feed is easier to log than rotating bandwidth pools
Decodo (formerly Smartproxy)
Per GB, tiered
$2.00-$3.75/GB depending on volume
Mid-volume scraping across many source domains where bandwidth, not IP count, is the cost driver
Oxylabs
Per GB, sales-assisted
Roughly $8/GB at entry tier, KYC required before provisioning
Enterprises that want a vendor-side KYC record as part of their own third-party risk file
Bright Data
Per GB (PAYG or committed)
$8.40/GB PAYG residential, down to ~$3/GB committed; datacenter from ~$0.90/GB
Large, multi-region collection programs where volume discounts offset the higher entry rate
The billing model split matters more than the headline price. A sanctions-list refresh job that hits the same twelve government sources every night at a predictable, low volume is a poor fit for per-GB bandwidth pricing – you're paying for a metric (data transferred) that has almost nothing to do with your actual constraint, which is IP reputation and consistency of access over time. Vendors like Proxys.io bill per dedicated IP per month, which lines up better with that access pattern and makes cost forecasting for a fixed set of monitored sources straightforward. A marketplace-pricing crawl that touches thousands of product pages across dozens of domains is the opposite case: bandwidth is the real cost driver, and a per-GB model from Decodo, Oxylabs or Bright Data scales more predictably with that workload. Enterprises already running Oxylabs' or Bright Data's own KYC process may lean on that as one input to their own vendor risk assessment, though it doesn't substitute for one.
Figure 2
Figure 2. The two variables that move cost are how many domains a run touches and how much data it moves, not the headline price per unit. Per-IP and per-GB rates are quoted in different units and cannot be compared directly.
None of these vendors, including the ones with published ethics or KYC pages, remove the fintech's own obligation to define a lawful basis, log what was collected, and honor retention limits. The proxy layer solves an availability and reliability problem – consistent access to public pages without disproportionate load on the source – not a data protection problem.
When the current setup stops being fit for purpose
Three signals usually mean a proxy or scraping setup needs to change, independent of price. First, a rising block rate on sources with unchanged rate limits – that's an IP-reputation problem the vendor's pool has accumulated, not something a compliance policy fixes. Second, the compliance team asking for source-level access logs the engineering stack can't currently produce – that's a signal the collection layer needs structured logging before it needs a new vendor. Third, a shift in workload shape, for example moving from a handful of steady, low-volume registry checks to broad multi-domain marketplace crawling, which usually means the per-IP pricing that worked for the first case stops making sense for the second.
Practical takeaway
A fintech data program built on public web sources holds up under regulatory review when three things are documented before the first request is ever sent: the lawful basis for each data category (not a blanket justification), the technical controls that keep collection proportionate to the source (rate limits, minimization, retention), and a request log detailed enough to reconstruct what was collected and why if a regulator or a counterparty's third-party risk team asks. The infrastructure vendor is a smaller decision than most procurement processes treat it as – it changes reliability and cost, not the underlying legal analysis.
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 8, 2026 | NCFA Fintech Whisperer | Digital Banking And BaaS, Regulation And Policy, SME Finance And Business Banking, Digital Assets Blockchain And Tokenization, Payments Infrastructure And Money Movement, Capital Markets Infrastructure And Funding, Artificial Intelligence And Data, Wealthtech Investing And Trading, Embedded Finance, Risk Compliance And Regtech, Lending Consumer Credit And BNPL, Cybersecurity Fraud And Financial Crime
Gate, which Alpaca says serves more than 58 million users, launched access to more than 10,000 U.S. listed stocks and ETFs, eligible IPO allocations and tokenized stocks using Alpaca infrastructure.
Alpaca provides the brokerage infrastructure behind the offering and supports custody and settlement of the underlying shares associated with Gate's gStocks tokenized stock product.
One day earlier, Crypto.com launched Tokenized Stocks through Alpaca for a platform serving more than 150 million customers, offering economic exposure to 1,500 U.S. stocks and ETFs from US$1, with selected products available around the clock.
Crypto.com's products are derivative financial instruments that provide economic exposure rather than ownership of the underlying shares or associated shareholder rights.
Large crypto platforms are starting to look more like multi asset investment distributors, but the infrastructure underneath them is still regulated brokerage, custody and settlement. Alpaca has been building specifically for this role, which NCFA recently examined in its global brokerage platform expansion. The competitive question is who controls that regulated layer as crypto, traditional securities and tokenized products converge inside the same customer interface.
BlackRock Canada launched the iShares Equity + Bitcoin ETF Portfolio, or IBQT, on the Toronto Stock Exchange with a strategic allocation of approximately 97% global equities and 3% bitcoin.
The fund carries a 0.22% management fee and packages Canadian, U.S., international and emerging market equities with bitcoin exposure inside one portfolio.
IBQT currently gets its bitcoin exposure through BlackRock’s Canadian IBIT fund, extending that product from a standalone bitcoin investment into a component of a diversified portfolio.
IBQT changes where the crypto allocation decision happens. Investors choosing the fund are buying a diversified equity portfolio with bitcoin already assigned a modest strategic weight, rather than adding crypto separately. That puts bitcoin closer to conventional portfolio construction and gives Canadian advisers and investors a simple way to combine traditional markets and digital assets in one listed product.
Flywire expanded its Trustly partnership into Canada and the United States, letting payers authorize large domestic and cross border payments directly from their bank accounts.
In Canada, the payment itself runs through Pre Authorized Debit. Trustly adds bank authentication and account connectivity around that existing rail rather than using Canada’s future regulated payment initiation framework.
The service removes manual account entry during checkout and adds payment verification and risk controls around higher value bank transfers.
Pay by Bank is reaching Canadian customers before regulated payment initiation does. Foreign providers are improving the experience around an existing Canadian bank rail instead of waiting for new infrastructure. That makes the commercial timing important for Canada’s open banking opportunity: future regulated access will enter a market where some of the customer experience is already being built.
Toronto based Dream Payments launched Dream Payouts for eligible U.S. businesses in collaboration with J.P. Morgan Payments, supporting payments to suppliers, partners and individuals.
Eligible payments can arrive through the RTP network in under 30 seconds, including nights, weekends and holidays, with ACH and wire available when instant delivery is unavailable or not selected.
Software platforms can embed payout capabilities, while Dream provides recipient onboarding, identity checks, banking verification, approval controls and transaction tracking from initiation through settlement.
Dream says the infrastructure can support software and AI agents that initiate, approve and reconcile payments within defined business controls.
Dream is taking infrastructure built by a Canadian fintech into U.S. business payment workflows where the payment can start inside the software that created the obligation. That also gives agent payment infrastructure a more concrete operating model: software can participate in the workflow, but identity, authority, approval and settlement controls still determine whether money moves.
Francisco Partners agreed to acquire Moneris from RBC and BMO for approximately C$2.0 billion in cash, with each bank receiving half of the proceeds. The transaction remains subject to regulatory approvals and other closing conditions.
RBC and BMO will keep exclusive referral relationships with Moneris even as ownership of the payments company transfers to Francisco Partners.
Moneris says it has nearly 2,000 employees in Canada and will retain its Canadian headquarters and technology infrastructure after the transaction closes.
Last year’s Moneris sale discussion has become a signed change of control. RBC and BMO are giving up ownership while preserving customer distribution, leaving Francisco Partners to decide how aggressively Moneris invests across merchant acquiring, commerce software and payments technology. The separation between infrastructure ownership and bank distribution is the more consequential part of the deal.
CIMPA and CDS will begin the first stage of Canada's fail fee framework for Government of Canada bond and T-bill transactions on September 8, 2026.
The trial will run for at least 18 months. Settlement fails and indicative fees will be calculated, statistics will be published and CDS participants will receive reports and indicative invoices.
No fail fees will be charged or paid during this first stage. The Canadian Fixed-Income Forum will decide whether payments are activated later.
Canada is putting a settlement discipline framework into live measurement before imposing a financial penalty. That gives dealers, custodians and market infrastructure providers time to see where fails occur, what the operational burden looks like and whether the fee design changes settlement behaviour. The evidence from the trial will determine whether a reporting framework eventually becomes an economic incentive.
CIMPA, TMX Group and Clearstream have started repo trading using a standardized Government of Canada General Collateral basket on the Canadian Collateral Management Service.
CCMS automates repo collateral management and supports unlimited real time collateral substitution, giving participants another way to manage liquidity and collateral throughout a transaction.
The first GoC basket is expected to be followed by standardized baskets covering provincial securities, Canada Mortgage Bonds, NHA mortgage backed securities, public sector securities and corporate collateral.
Canada's repo market now has a standardized collateral workflow running on infrastructure that the Bank of Canada also plans to use for its domestic repo operations. Wider adoption would make collateral easier to allocate and substitute across financing activity while reducing manual processing. The next evidence is usage: how much repo activity migrates onto CCMS and whether the additional baskets deepen participation beyond Government of Canada securities.
PointsKash announced an expanded strategic capital commitment of up to US$100 million from Hawk Capital Advisors to support commercialization and national deployment of its financial services platform.
The first phase provides for up to US$35 million through October 30, 2026 for priorities including refurbishment and deployment of approximately 2,100 company owned KashPoint kiosks, technology integration, merchant activation, PK Pay development and working capital.
A second phase could provide up to another US$65 million between February and April 2027, subject to operating and deployment milestones, customary closing conditions and financing availability.
The financing connects capital directly to deployment of a physical and digital financial services network rather than funding an undefined expansion plan. PointsKash acquired more than 2,100 cryptocurrency kiosks earlier in August and now has a staged capital structure intended to refurbish and redeploy that hardware while building payments, merchant and mobile services around it. The conditional structure also keeps a clear line between near term funding and the larger amount that depends on execution.
CIRO now requires a Participant or Access Person to have a reasonable expectation that a short sale can settle on the intended settlement date before entering the order.
The rule adds a positive control before execution instead of relying only on action after a trade fails to settle.
CIRO provides defined exceptions, including certain sales involving securities a person is deemed to own, subject to prescribed delivery conditions.
The rule changes where settlement risk has to be dealt with. Firms must support the expectation of settlement before a short sale reaches the market, putting more responsibility on trading controls, securities availability and supervision. Difficult to borrow securities and repeated settlement failures will show how demanding the requirement becomes in practice.
Reserve Bank of India Governor Sanjay Malhotra told banks to maintain inventories of material AI systems and establish governance that assigns clear responsibility for their use and risks.
He called for contracts with AI providers to preserve audit, explanation and exit rights, while material systems should be stress tested and tested against adversarial behaviour before deployment and periodically afterward.
Banks should retain meaningful human oversight where an AI error could materially harm a customer or financial stability, including lending, fraud and other consequential decisions.
RBI is pushing AI governance into the same operating disciplines banks already use for material risk. That aligns with Canadian work on regulated AI, where model oversight, vendor access, fallback plans and proof of control are becoming practical requirements. The advantage will come from deploying useful AI while being able to show who owns the risk and how the system is controlled.
Brazil’s central bank is assessing bilateral connections between Pix and foreign instant-payment systems, as well as participation in multilateral payment hubs, to support lower-cost and faster cross-border transfers.
The work goes beyond earlier discussion of possible international expansion. Banco Central do Brasil had already placed Pix Internacional on its 2027+ development agenda in March, and the August update points to more concrete interoperability options.
Pix processed nearly 80 billion transactions worth more than R$35 trillion in 2025, giving any international connection potential scale well beyond a niche cross-border payment product.
Pix is starting to test whether a national instant-payment rail can connect directly into foreign payment infrastructure rather than relying only on traditional correspondent channels. NCFA’s cross border payments benchmark shows why that distinction matters: strong domestic rails don’t automatically solve international cost, speed or interoperability. The practical questions are which systems Brazil connects to first, how FX, compliance and settlement are handled across jurisdictions, and whether this becomes a repeatable model for other domestic real time rails.
The OCC granted preliminary conditional approval for World Liberty Trust Company, National Association, the proposed national trust bank of Trump family backed World Liberty Financial.
The approved business plan covers USD1 issuance and redemption, maintenance of USD1 reserve assets, fiduciary digital asset custody and limited conversion services for custody customers.
The approval is not authority to begin operations. The proposed bank is limited to trust company activities, does not plan to become an FDIC insured depository institution and must satisfy remaining OCC conditions before commencing business.
USD1 could move from a stablecoin structure supported by external service providers into a federally supervised trust bank that combines issuance, redemption, reserves and custody. That would bring more of the operating stack behind a payment stablecoin inside one regulated entity, while concentrating responsibility for reserve management, safeguarding and compliance.
Deribit FZE received a Broker Dealer Licence from Dubai's Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority, expanding the permissions behind its existing regulated spot trading operation.
Spot buy, sell and trade orders placed on Deribit can now be routed to Coinbase Exchange for execution, giving clients access to deeper liquidity and hundreds of additional assets.
The upgraded spot service is rolling out to retail, qualified and institutional investors. Assets acquired through it can also be used as collateral for Deribit derivatives trading, subject to regulatory approval.
The Coinbase acquisition is moving from ownership into shared market infrastructure. Deribit can keep its derivatives interface while drawing on Coinbase's spot liquidity and execution stack, extending the Deribit acquisition strategy into day to day trading. That brings spot execution, collateral and derivatives closer together inside one regulated operating structure.
PM MTF Ltd received CySEC authorization under MiCA for crypto asset services alongside its existing regulated European trading venue.
The authorized activities include operating a crypto asset trading platform, custody and administration, execution of orders, reception and transmission of orders, and crypto asset transfers.
The authorization provides a regulated route for Perpetual Markets to extend crypto services across the EEA, including infrastructure that can support institutional and white label distribution.
The significance is the combination of existing regulated market infrastructure with newly authorized crypto services. Rather than building a separate crypto venue, Perpetual Markets can extend an established MTF operating model into digital assets, giving brokers and institutions another route to offer crypto products under a European regulatory framework. The announcement authorizes expansion, but does not establish that every permitted crypto service is already live at scale.
Hong Kong licensed issuer Anchorpoint began phase one of HKD At Par, or HKDAP, through Beta Access for institutional distributors and professional investors.
Authorized distributors can provide conversion between HKDAP and fiat currency for institutions, corporate users and professional investors while integrating the stablecoin into commercial and financial applications.
Anchorpoint is initially targeting cross border payments and settlement and distribution of tokenized real world assets. Broader retail access could begin as early as the end of 2026, depending on market conditions.
Hong Kong's stablecoin regime has crossed from licensing into controlled distribution and commercial use. That builds on the tokenized finance strategy NCFA has been tracking through Standard Chartered and Hong Kong's regulators. HKDAP now has to prove that regulated tokenized money can attract repeat transaction flow across payments, asset settlement and institutional distribution rather than remain a licensed product with limited circulation.
Coinbase received Financial Services Permission from the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of ADGM to arrange investment deals and provide custody in support of tokenized securities.
Coinbase says securities issued through the structure will be backed by underlying shares, with verified token holders receiving shareholder rights including dividends and voting.
Transfers will be subject to ongoing sanctions screening, with wallet level freeze and seizure capabilities where required.
The important distinction is the legal and operating structure behind the token. Coinbase is combining regulated custody, underlying shares, investor rights and blockchain transferability rather than offering price exposure alone. That puts the model inside the infrastructure test NCFA is tracking for regulated tokenized assets: whether ownership rights, custody, compliance and transfer can work together at market scale.
Robinhood has begun rolling crypto trading out to eligible UK customers, adding more than 50 digital assets directly inside its main investing app alongside equities, ISAs, options and futures.
Crypto trading is provided through Bitstamp UK Ltd, bringing the regulated UK infrastructure Robinhood acquired with Bitstamp into Robinhood’s retail distribution channel. Robinhood completed the acquisition in June 2025 to accelerate its crypto expansion outside the U.S.
The rollout is a material follow-on to Robinhood’s July 1 announcement, when the company said UK crypto trading was coming soon but had not yet launched it. Robinhood’s own disclosure at the time still said its UK entity did not offer crypto trading or custody.
The launch also adds Cortex Digests for Crypto, using generative AI to combine news, market data, technical indicators and Robinhood information into asset-level market summaries.
Bitstamp is becoming more than an acquired exchange for Robinhood. Its UK crypto infrastructure now lets Robinhood add digital assets to the same interface where customers already invest across traditional markets. The next test is whether that combination deepens customer activity and gives Robinhood a repeatable way to extend its wider investment platform into regulated crypto markets.
Revolut announced phased testing of EURR on Ethereum for eligible customers in Denmark, Poland and Portugal beginning in August.
EURR is a euro-pegged e-money token issued by Bridge Building S.A., a Stripe company regulated by Luxembourg’s CSSF as a MiCA crypto-asset service provider and electronic money institution.
Eligible customers can use EURR across supported crypto services, external wallets and blockchain networks. Revolut expects to add more markets later in 2026 and says stablecoins tied to other currencies are in development through separate regulatory processes.
Bridge provides the regulated issuance while Revolut distributes EURR through its customer app. NCFA tracked Bridge’s European authorizations in July. The immediate evidence is limited to phased testing in three markets, and Revolut has not published EURR circulation, adoption or transaction-volume data.
Shakepay launched BLOC, a revolving line of credit that lets eligible Canadian customers borrow against bitcoin held with Shakepay without selling it.
Customers can borrow up to C$50,000 starting at 9.5% APR and track their balance, payments, collateral and loan to value ratio inside the Shakepay app.
BLOC is offered by Shakepay Credit Inc. under exemptive relief. If collateral values fall, borrowers may need to add bitcoin, repay part of the balance or face liquidation under the product terms.
Crypto backed lending is becoming part of the product stack offered by Canadian trading platforms. Shakepay is integrating the credit relationship directly into its own account experience, while embedded crypto lending at Netcoins uses APX to supply the lending operation behind the interface. The two models create different economics and different responsibility for underwriting, collateral controls and servicing.
Better and Coinbase opened their token-backed conforming mortgage to eligible Coinbase One members on August 12, according to an August 26 company announcement.
Better originates and services the mortgage, Coinbase powers the digital-asset component and the first lien is designed to meet Fannie Mae guidelines.
Approved borrowers can pledge crypto without selling it. Eligible Coinbase One members can receive a lender-funded closing credit equal to 1% of the mortgage value, capped at US$10,000.
The earlier waitlist represented more than US$260 million in projected loan volume. That figure indicates demand, not funded mortgages.
General availability converts the earlier token-backed mortgage launch into an open lending product. Funded volume, borrower performance, collateral custody and the treatment of pledged assets during delinquency will show whether the model can operate at conforming-mortgage scale.
Toronto based Mortgage Automator launched Draw Management, bringing construction budgets, draw schedules and approvals directly into the active loan file for private lenders.
The feature automatically flags budget variances and applies Project Health scoring so lenders can monitor construction progress and draw risk without relying on separate spreadsheets or disconnected workflows.
The launch follows Mortgage Automator's August 4 acquisition of Lendr, extending its expansion into construction and private lending infrastructure across North America.
Construction lending is operationally intensive because capital is released in stages and each draw depends on current budget, progress and compliance information. Moving those controls into the loan system can reduce reconciliation work and make exceptions visible earlier, while giving private lenders a more integrated way to manage construction credit as portfolios scale.
TD launched an in-app payroll direct-deposit switching experience that lets customers redirect payroll deposits to a TD account in about one minute with most employers.
The capability is powered by Atomic and sits inside the TD app, removing the need for customers to separately obtain banking details and update payroll information through their employer.
TD says it is the first Canadian financial institution to offer a fully integrated in-app payroll switching experience and has exclusive Canadian rights to Atomic’s capability through the end of 2026.
Opening a new bank account is easier than making it the primary account. Payroll switching reduces the work required to redirect recurring income and adds an operational layer to open banking and financial portability. Competition improves when customers can act on a better banking option, not only compare one. The next measure is whether easier switching translates into more primary-account relationships and deposits.
Revolut Bank S.A. received a full French banking licence following a joint assessment by France’s ACPR and the European Central Bank, with the decision formally adopted by the ECB Governing Council.
The new French bank will begin serving customers in France before progressively expanding across Germany, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain. Revolut Bank UAB in Lithuania remains the group’s other European banking hub.
Revolut says Western Europe now accounts for about 30 million customers. It has committed more than €1 billion to the region and is hiring more than 600 people across its Western European markets.
The licence turns Revolut’s banking expansion into a two-hub European structure with a new regulated entity serving its largest regional customer base. The execution test is how quickly customers and products migrate to the French bank, and whether local licences give Revolut more room to deepen lending, business banking and other regulated services across Western Europe.
The CFTC exercised emergency authority after Kalshi notified the Commission of a market emergency tied to litigation brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
The Commission ordered Kalshi to continue operating in accordance with the Commodity Exchange Act Core Principles. New York is seeking to stop Kalshi from offering event contracts nationwide and is pursuing more than US$36 billion in damages.
The CFTC says federal law requires a uniform national derivatives market and has challenged state efforts to apply gambling laws to federally regulated designated contract markets in several jurisdictions.
The dispute is becoming a direct test of who controls access to event contracts in the United States. The CFTC is treating Kalshi as national derivatives infrastructure while states continue to challenge parts of the market through gaming law. NCFA’s regulated event contract infrastructure brief tracks the same boundary between exchange regulation, market integrity and product access.
ClearScore, Modulr, Teya, Urban Jungle and Zilch became the first firms regulated solely by the FCA to join its Scale-up Unit.
The unit gives fast-growing regulated firms a dedicated regulatory contact for product launches, permission changes, policy developments and other issues that arise as they expand.
The FCA also published findings from a 15-firm high-growth pilot, including weaknesses where governance, board oversight, risk management and controls had not kept pace with business growth.
The FCA is making regulatory engagement part of the scale up process rather than waiting for rapid growth to create supervisory problems. NCFA’s closer look at the five firms shows how that support intersects with payments, credit, insurance and European expansion. For fintechs, the tradeoff is clearer: faster access to regulatory guidance comes with closer attention to whether governance, controls and customer protections are developing at the same rate as products, customers and market expansion.
Senate leadership filed cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 3633, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, after the chamber left for its August recess without voting on the bill.
The Senate schedule says the cloture motion will ripen on September 15 at 2:15 p.m., creating a formal procedural route toward floor consideration when senators return.
The bill still faces a 60-vote threshold and unresolved negotiations, including bank concerns over stablecoin rewards and proposed ethics provisions.
The CLARITY Act has moved from an uncertain post-recess commitment to a scheduled Senate procedure. The September vote will test whether negotiators can assemble enough support to advance a federal market-structure framework and narrow the remaining disagreements over banking, stablecoins and digital-asset oversight.
Mercury launched Mercury Spend with budgets, expense policies and company cards managed through one spending system.
Businesses can issue dedicated cards to AI agents for approved transactions and monitor their spending separately from employee activity.
Budgets and expense policies provide the control layer around those cards, while Mercury can automatically categorize transactions and lock cards when required tasks remain overdue.
The important change is that an AI agent can now receive its own controlled payment credential rather than only prepare a transaction for someone else. That makes permission design part of the payment product. NCFA has already tracked how AI agents use card rails; Mercury brings the same question inside company spending, where budgets and policy controls define how much authority software actually receives.
SIDBI and MonetaGo confirmed that Secure Financing is live on SIDBI’s GST-Sahay invoice-based financing platform following a pilot and three months of production use.
The system validates invoices financed through India’s TReDS infrastructure and checks invoices across participating factoring platforms and lenders, including SBI Global Factors and India Factoring.
The production milestone follows the November 2025 SIDBI-MonetaGo partnership. The system is designed to identify duplicate financing and strengthen invoice validation before credit is advanced to MSMEs.
Invoice financing fraud controls are becoming shared lending infrastructure rather than checks performed inside one lender at a time. MonetaGo has been working on shared trade finance fraud controls for years; the SIDBI deployment brings that model into live MSME lending. The test is whether interoperable validation reduces duplicate financing and exceptions at scale while making cash flow credit faster and safer across multiple lenders and factoring platforms.
De Nederlandsche Bank granted Mews Financial Services B.V. an Electronic Money Institution licence, giving the hospitality software company regulated financial standing across the EEA.
Mews plans to bring payment services, financial workflows and hotel operating data into the same platform, alongside safeguarding, fraud monitoring, sanctions screening and anti money laundering controls.
The company processed US$19.7 billion in hotel transaction value in 2025. Regulated capabilities are expected to begin with a Netherlands pilot in late 2026 before expanding across the EEA.
Mews is taking embedded finance beyond connecting hotels to outside financial providers. Its own regulated entity can now sit inside the software where hotel revenue, operations and payments already meet. That changes the regulatory boundary for embedded finance: vertical software can become part of the licensed financial infrastructure instead of remaining only the distribution layer.
TransFi launched JARVIS, a proprietary compliance intelligence platform that combines KYC and sanctions screening, internet profiling, behavioural and biometric signals, and fiat and blockchain transaction monitoring.
JARVIS builds risk profiles, uses heuristics and AI research to recommend actions on high confidence matches, and escalates complex or ambiguous cases for human review.
Final KYC, KYB, transaction monitoring and screening decisions remain with TransFi's compliance team under MLRO oversight.
AI is entering compliance as an investigation and decision support layer rather than replacing accountable human approval. That model fits the emerging market for AI powered compliance workflows where evidence, escalation, auditability and human control determine whether automation can be trusted. TransFi's operating test is whether JARVIS reduces review effort across multiple jurisdictions without weakening decision quality.
Trezor disclosed that a breach at shipping provider ShipMonk exposed customer information including names, email addresses, phone numbers and shipping addresses.
Approximately 11,742 customers had full contact and shipping information exposed, while another 1,947 had partial exposure, bringing the affected total to about 13,689 customers.
Trezor says its own systems, devices and services were not compromised. The company warns that the exposed information could instead be used for more sophisticated phishing and impersonation attempts.
The breach shows how self custody can inherit risk from suppliers that never touch a private key. Fulfilment providers still hold enough identity and location data to expose hardware wallet owners to targeted attacks, making vendor controls and data retention part of hardware wallet security rather than a separate privacy issue.
Weekly Close
Financial infrastructure is becoming easier to enter and harder to operate well. Bank switching is getting simpler, payments are becoming programmable, AI agents are gaining spending authority and software platforms are taking on regulated financial roles. At the same time, regulators are putting more weight on governance, settlement discipline, market access and accountability. The competitive advantage is moving toward firms that can combine better distribution with stronger control of the infrastructure underneath it.
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 14, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Payments Infrastructure And Money Movement, SME Finance And Business Banking, Embedded Finance
Dream Payments Launches U.S. Real-Time Payouts With J.P. Morgan
On August 11, 2026, Toronto-based Dream Payments launchedDream Payouts, a U.S. real-time business payment networkwith J.P. Morgan Payments. The platform lets eligible U.S. businesses pay suppliers, contractors and other recipients using an email address, with qualifying payments delivered through The Clearing House RTP network.
Dream isn't building a new payment rail. It's putting bank accounts, supplier onboarding, payment controls and real-time payouts into software businesses already use.
That gives Dream a potentially valuable position between the bank infrastructure that moves the money and the business workflow that decides when, where and why it should move.
How Dream Payouts Works
A business enters a supplier's email address. Dream then invites the recipient into its Payee Portal, where they verify their identity with multi-factor authentication, enter and maintain their own banking information and choose how they want to be paid.
The email itself never carries payment instructions or banking details. Once enrolled, a recipient can receive future payments without the payer collecting or manually updating their account information. Eligible RTP payments can arrive in under 30 seconds, including nights, weekends and holidays. ACH and wire are available when real-time delivery isn't available or isn't selected.
Businesses can fund payments through Dream Wallet, a payments account provided through J.P. Morgan subject to eligibility and account-opening requirements. Dream also separates payment requests from payment release through roles, limits and approval workflows, while transactions are tracked from initiation through settlement. That is more useful than speed alone. Supplier payments still require banking information, approvals, payment status and reconciliation. Dream is bringing those steps into one controlled workflow.
RTP Turns Real-Time Payments Into A Software Feature
As of July 2026, The Clearing House RTP network had more than 1,322 participating financial institutions. It operates around the clock, settles payments with finality and supports transactions up to US$10 million. The network processed 142 million payments worth US$576 billion in the second quarter of 2026.
Dream Payouts identifies RTP for eligible real-time delivery. Its public launch material doesn't say FedNow is part of the current product, so the two networks shouldn't be treated as interchangeable.
Other payment infrastructure providers are also making instant-payment rails easier to access through software. The competitive question is becoming less about connecting to a rail and more about what a provider builds around it.
Dream combines a J.P. Morgan-provided payments account, recipient onboarding, payment controls and embedded distribution. Mantle shows how that can work. The family-office software platform has embedded Dream Payouts so a capital call can be reviewed, approved and paid inside the same system where the obligation is managed. The payment becomes part of the workflow instead of a separate trip to a bank portal.
Dream Payments Built From POS To Embedded Payments
Dream began in Toronto in 2014 with mobile point-of-sale technology, but its business progressively moved deeper into payment infrastructure.
In 2018, Dream and Mastercard expanded into digital insurance payouts. Northbridge Financial became the first Canadian insurer announced for the service, with Mastercard Send connecting Dream's infrastructure to claims disbursements.
In 2024, Dream launched DreamPay embedded payments across North America, bringing payment collection, payouts and orchestration into an API-based platform for financial institutions, insurers and software companies.
The J.P. Morgan relationship also predates Dream Payouts. In 2025, Dream launched a North American insurance payment network using J.P. Morgan Payments' banking infrastructure, treasury services and pay-in and payout rails.
Dream has been applying the same model in Canada. In May 2026, Dream DriverPay began rolling out with Script Runner, allowing healthcare delivery drivers to receive earnings through Interac e-Transfer for Business using an email address or mobile number.
Dream Payouts takes that operating model beyond a specific industry. The company is testing whether recipient onboarding, payment controls and bank-rail access can become reusable infrastructure for U.S. businesses and the software platforms serving them.
AI Agents Add A New Payment-Control Test
Dream says software platforms can use the infrastructure as a foundation for AI agents to initiate, approve and reconcile payments.
Dream Payouts already separates payment requests from payment release through roles, limits and approval workflows. Its public material doesn't establish that an AI agent can independently release company funds without those controls.
As AI agents enter payment workflows, the commercial question is practical: what can software initiate, what still requires approval and who is accountable when money leaves the account?
Dream Payments Expands Canadian Fintech Infrastructure Into The U.S.
Dream Payouts is a U.S. product built on U.S. banking and instant-payment infrastructure, but the company behind it remains headquartered in Toronto.
Canada shouldn't be reduced to a comparison about payment speed. Dream already uses Interac e-Transfer for Business for embedded payouts here, while its U.S. products connect to different rails and banking infrastructure.
Dream doesn't need to own the underlying rail if it can make different rails easier to use inside insurance platforms, healthcare systems, family-office software and other business applications.
Banks retain the regulated accounts and payment infrastructure while companies such as Dream compete to own more of the software, controls and workflow around each transaction.
Talking Point
If banks own the accounts and payment rails but fintechs increasingly own the onboarding, controls and software workflow around them, which layer will own the most valuable business relationship?
NCFA Company Intelligence Snapshot
Dream Payments
Embedded payment and payout infrastructure for financial institutions, insurers and software platforms
Last updated Aug 13, 2026
Company At A Glance
Founded2014
HeadquartersToronto, Ontario
Co-FoundersBrent Ho-Young, Anant Tailor and Long Van; original venture history also includes Greg Wolfond
CEOBrent Ho-Young
StatusPrivate
Capital / Funding$27.5M historical funding reported by 2018; current cumulative funding not publicly verified
Core PlatformDreamPay
ProductsPayment acceptance, payouts, orchestration, payment accounts and embedded payment APIs
CustomersFinancial institutions, insurers, software platforms and enterprises
MarketsCanada and United States
Milestones
Select a milestone to follow Dream Payments’ development
1Launch2014–2015
2U.S. Expansion2016–2017
3Insurance Payouts2018
4DreamPay2024
5J.P. Morgan Network2025
6Business Payouts2026
Milestone 1
Mobile Payments Launch (2014–2015)
Dream Payments was founded in Toronto in 2014 and initially built mobile point-of-sale technology for financial institutions and merchants.
Company
Dream PaymentsToronto financial technology company focused on digital payments
Stage
LaunchMobile point-of-sale was the first commercial product
Capital
$6M RoundEarly venture funding supported product development
Markets
CanadaInitial commercialization centred on Canadian payments
Customers
Banks And MerchantsFinancial institutions became an important distribution channel
Competition
Bank DistributionDream supplied technology that financial institutions could put in front of business customers
Additional Company Data
Dream was founded in Toronto in 2014
The original product supported mobile card acceptance
Financial institutions became an early route to business customers
NCFA Perspective
Dream started by helping financial institutions modernize merchant payments. That distribution model remains visible today: the company builds around regulated financial infrastructure rather than trying to replace it.
Milestone 2
Capital And U.S. Expansion (2016–2017)
Dream raised additional capital and expanded into the United States, investing in its payments cloud and third-party application ecosystem.
Company
Dream PaymentsThe company extended its payments infrastructure beyond Canada
Stage
U.S. ExpansionAmerican operations became a funded growth priority
Capital
$10M Series APart of $27.5M in historical funding reported by 2018
Markets
Canada And U.S.U.S. expansion began years before the current Dream Payouts launch
Customers
Financial InstitutionsBanks remained an important route to business users
Competition
Payments CloudThe product began expanding beyond a mobile payment terminal
Additional Company Data
A $1.5 million Connecticut Innovations financing preceded the Series A
The Series A supported U.S. expansion and third-party applications
Dream's U.S. strategy therefore predates Dream Payouts by almost a decade
NCFA Perspective
The U.S. market isn't new territory for Dream. The 2026 launch is better understood as a larger use of infrastructure the company has been building across both countries for years.
Milestone 3
Insurance Payments Move Into Software (2018)
Dream and Mastercard expanded the company beyond merchant acceptance into digital insurance payouts. Mastercard Send connected Dream's infrastructure to claims disbursements, with Northbridge Financial becoming the first Canadian insurer announced for the service and a Dream Claims Payments API following later in 2018.
Company
Dream Payments HubInsurance payouts became a larger part of the company's payment infrastructure
Stage
Embedded PayoutsPayment execution moved inside insurance workflows
Capital
Platform InvestmentEarlier growth capital supported payment APIs and partner integrations
Markets
Canada And U.S.The insurance strategy was designed for North American expansion
Customers
InsurersClaims teams could connect digital payouts to existing systems
Competition
Embedded ClaimsDream competed on integration and payout execution rather than payment acceptance alone
Additional Company Data
Mastercard announced the global Dream partnership in February 2018
Northbridge Financial was the first Canadian insurer announced for the service
The model gave insurers a way to digitize claims disbursements through existing systems
NCFA Perspective
This is where Dream began looking much more like infrastructure. Payment execution became a capability another company could put inside its own software and customer experience.
Milestone 4
DreamPay Platform Launch (2024)
Dream launched DreamPay as a North American API and embedded-payments platform for financial institutions, insurers and software companies.
Company
DreamPayPayment capabilities were brought together under a wider API platform
Stage
PlatformDream expanded from individual products into reusable payment infrastructure
Capital
PrivateNo new financing tied to the launch was publicly disclosed
Markets
North AmericaThe platform was launched across Canada and the United States
Customers
Banks, Insurers And PlatformsEnterprise and software workflows became core distribution channels
The platform supports payment collection, payouts and orchestration
Financial products can be embedded into partner applications through APIs
NCFA Perspective
DreamPay made the company's strategy clearer. The product was no longer a collection of payment services. It was becoming a reusable layer between financial infrastructure and business software.
Milestone 5
J.P. Morgan Insurance Network (2025)
Dream launched a North American insurance payment network using J.P. Morgan Payments' banking infrastructure, treasury services and pay-in and payout rails.
Company
DreamPay Insurance Payment HubPremium collection and claims payouts operate through one payment platform
Stage
Institutional InfrastructureDream combined its software with J.P. Morgan payment capabilities
Capital
Bank InfrastructureThe relationship expands operating capacity without Dream becoming the bank
Markets
Canada And U.S.One platform supports insurance payment workflows across both markets
Customers
Insurance IndustryCarriers, MGAs, TPAs and insurance software platforms
Competition
Bank + Fintech StackJ.P. Morgan provides banking and payment infrastructure while Dream provides workflow and integration
Additional Company Data
The platform supports both premium collection and claims payments
J.P. Morgan infrastructure supports U.S. real-time payments and ACH alongside Canadian payment methods
Insurity was identified as the first insurance software platform to embed Dream's payment services
NCFA Perspective
Dream doesn't need to become the bank to control an important part of the payment experience. J.P. Morgan supplies regulated banking and payment infrastructure while Dream puts that infrastructure inside the software insurers and businesses already use.
Milestone 6
U.S. Business Payout Network (2026)
Dream expanded its infrastructure to eligible U.S. businesses through Dream Payouts, combining a J.P. Morgan-provided payments account, supplier onboarding, RTP delivery, payment controls and software-platform integration.
Company
Dream PayoutsBusiness payout infrastructure built on Dream's wider payment platform
Stage
U.S. Business NetworkDream is extending beyond industry-specific payment products
Capital
Dream WalletPayments account provided through J.P. Morgan subject to eligibility and onboarding
Markets
United StatesAvailable now to eligible U.S. businesses
Customers
Businesses And Software PlatformsCompanies can pay suppliers, contractors and other recipients directly or through embedded software
Competition
Workflow + Rail AccessRecipient onboarding and payment controls sit alongside real-time payment access
Additional Company Data
Eligible RTP payments can arrive in under 30 seconds
ACH and wire remain available when RTP isn't available or selected
Mantle has embedded Dream Payouts for family-office capital-call workflows
Roles, limits and approval workflows control payment release
Dream positions AI agents as an emerging use case, but autonomous release of customer funds hasn't been established publicly
NCFA Perspective
Dream is competing for more of the workflow around a business payment. The commercial test is whether businesses and software platforms choose Dream as the layer connecting their operating systems to bank payment infrastructure.
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 13, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Digital Assets Blockchain And Tokenization, Capital Markets Infrastructure And Funding, Regulation And Policy
Coinbase Tests How Regulated Securities Can Work Onchain
On August 11, 2026, Coinbase received Financial Services Permission from the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Abu Dhabi Global Market to establish a regulated tokenization hub in Abu Dhabi, allowing it to arrange investment deals and provide custody for tokenized securities.
The licence gives Coinbase a regulated structure for putting share-backed securities into digital wallets while keeping investor rights, sanctions controls and securities rules attached. The real test is whether tokenized securities can work in digital wallets without losing the investor rights and controls behind them.
The Token Comes With Conditions
Coinbase says securities issued through the ADGM structure are fully backed by underlying shares and can give verified holders economic and voting rights.
The terms are more specific. Only securities that meet the prospectus's vesting conditions carry certain rights, including voting. Dividends are automatically reinvested, while redemption is limited to eligible vested holders. Investors exercising redemption also need an appropriate brokerage or bank account capable of receiving the proceeds.
The FSRA approved prospectus register shows the legal structure in practice. Coinbase Onchain SPV Ltd is listed as issuer of NVIDIA CB Certificates, ticker NVDAc, classified as Certificates over Shares. The primary prospectus was approved on August 4, 2026.
Investors therefore aren't simply holding NVIDIA shares on a blockchain. They're holding a Coinbase-issued security linked to underlying shares, with ownership rights governed by the certificate and prospectus.
That point matters as tokenized securities develop measurable business models around custody, distribution, liquidity and investor rights. The technology can change how a security is held and transferred without removing the legal machinery underneath it.
Wallet Access Doesn't Make The Security Permissionless
Coinbase says investors transacting only in these digital securities don't need to establish a traditional brokerage account or correspondent banking relationship. They need a wallet.
Every transfer is still subject to sanctions screening, and Coinbase says assets can be frozen or seized at the wallet level when required.
That puts the wallet in a different role from the early crypto idea of bypassing financial intermediaries. It becomes another way to distribute and hold a regulated security while identity, custody, corporate actions and redemption remain part of the system.
Several operating details aren't public yet. Coinbase hasn't disclosed the full range of securities, all eligible jurisdictions, the blockchain network, secondary trading venues or how freely the securities can move between third-party wallets and applications.
Those details will determine the scope of the hub as market infrastructure or it remains primarily a new distribution channel.
Tokenized Equities Are Competing On Distribution
Coinbase is entering a market where competitors are already testing different ways to connect tokenized securities with traditional market infrastructure.
The value isn't in listing another tokenized stock. It is in making issuance, custody, trading, corporate actions and redemption work well enough that investors can actually use the asset.
Coinbase brings its existing wallet, custody and trading network into that contest. It is also expanding beyond crypto into a wider financial platform, a strategy already visible in the competition between Coinbase and Robinhood across trading, derivatives and new financial products.
Canada remains a separate regulatory market. Coinbase Canada's investment platform expansion includes ambitions around stocks and other products, but the Abu Dhabi authorization doesn't establish approval or availability for Canadian investors.
Talking Point
If tokenized equities can travel through wallets but still depend on issuers, custodians, eligibility rules and redemption infrastructure, how much of the capital market has actually changed?
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 central idea is personal empowerment. Zuckerberg argues that advanced AI should give individuals more ability to create, learn, build businesses, improve their health and pursue their own goals rather than placing most of that intelligence under the control of governments, large institutions or a handful of AI companies.
Meta's vision imagines personal agents working continuously on a user's behalf, small teams building companies that once required much larger organizations, personalized tutors, faster scientific discovery and powerful creative tools available to billions of people.
Meta wants AI capability spread widely, while the compute, models, release decisions and government relationships needed to provide it remain concentrated among a handful of organizations.
Mark Zuckerberg, Founder and CEO, Meta:
“The defining questions of our age are who will have access to superintelligence and what will we direct it towards.”
Meta Is Betting On Invention More Than Automation
One of Zuckerberg's strongest economic arguments is that AI's biggest contribution could come from helping people invent things rather than simply automating today's jobs.
Meta expects individuals to become capable of doing work that currently requires larger teams, more capital or specialized expertise. Zuckerberg predicts more small businesses, more experimentation and potentially more employment as people use AI to create products, services and jobs that don't exist today.
That is a different vision from a future where AI mainly replaces knowledge work. Meta argues that if personal agents increase people's capabilities quickly enough, workers can adapt and new demand can grow alongside automation.
For founders, that could change the economics of starting a company. Product development, research, design, marketing and operations could require fewer people and less initial capital. Small firms could reach meaningful scale much earlier.
Financial services will feel the same pressure. Meta already has AI that can plan work, connect with email and calendars and continue tasks after the user leaves. As agents gain access to financial information and connected services, permissions and accountability become part of the operating model, especially when an agent can act rather than simply advise.
Meta Thinks Distributing AI Can Also Make It Safer
The more unusual part of Zuckerberg's argument is about safety.
He rejects the idea that one centrally controlled superintelligence can be aligned to a single set of values that works for everyone. People disagree about politics, economics, culture and what makes a good life.
Meta's answer is to distribute powerful AI widely enough that people, businesses, governments and competing AI systems check one another.
It is essentially a balance of power argument. One person with vastly better legal, financial or cybersecurity intelligence could gain an enormous advantage. If many people have access to comparable capabilities, Meta argues that power becomes harder to monopolize. (There’s some irony here. Zuckerberg built his fortune by controlling access to data, distribution and network effects that others couldn’t easily replicate.)
That philosophy also influences Meta's approach to alignment. Personal agents should primarily help users pursue their own goals within legal and safety boundaries rather than enforce one company's view of what those goals should be.
Meta says it plans to build a private mode where even Meta can't access a user's information, and it intends to resume releasing some open models. It is also giving its independent board authority to approve safety criteria for model releases rather than leaving those decisions entirely with Zuckerberg or management.
Meta's existing algorithmic products are already under legal scrutiny, including a federal trial involving 29 U.S. states over alleged harm to children. Meta denies the allegations. A company asking people to trust far more capable personal agents will have to show that user empowerment, privacy and safety work in practice. Algorithmic accountability is already moving into the courts as AI and automated systems take on a larger role in people's lives.
The Vision Extends Into Government And Geopolitics
Zuckerberg's decentralization argument has limits.
He wants individuals to have broad access to powerful AI, but he also argues that the United States and its allies should retain leadership in advanced models, silicon and infrastructure. Meta supports continued restrictions on exports of leading chips to geopolitical rivals and wants U.S. policy to make it easier to build data centres and energy capacity.
He also proposes closer cooperation between frontier AI labs and government. Rather than waiting until an advanced model is finished, Meta wants labs to share intermediate model checkpoints and technical staff so governments can identify cybersecurity and other security risks earlier.
The result still leaves considerable power with governments, frontier labs and the companies that control advanced compute. Individuals would gain far more capability. Governments would receive earlier access for security purposes. Independent boards would get more authority over release standards. Frontier labs would still control development of the most capable models.
Meta's vision is therefore decentralized at the user level while retaining substantial institutional coordination at the frontier.
Meta Has To Finance The Future It Is Promising
Meta expects capital spending of US$130 billion to US$145 billion in 2026 and spent US$31.08 billion in the second quarter alone. It is investing in models, data centres, energy, networking, its own chips and outside accelerators while trying to deliver AI across products already used by billions of people.
If personal superintelligence is going to be free or affordable at global scale, someone still has to pay for the compute..
Meta wants superintelligence broadly distributed, but scarce compute still has to be allocated. Its answer is a dynamic auction for additional capacity, which means the vision of AI for everyone could still produce tiers of access based partly on what users can afford. (conflict?)
The business model hasn't been proven. Meta's second quarter free cash flow fell to US$784 million as infrastructure spending accelerated, even while its core advertising business remained highly profitable.
Meta is making these commitments under real pressure. Its infrastructure spending has climbed rapidly, the company is still building the compute capacity and custom chips needed to compete at the frontier, and its existing platforms face growing legal scrutiny.
The scale of the investment also reinforces a central tension in Zuckerberg's vision. Meta wants personal AI to give individuals more power, but only a small number of companies can currently finance the systems needed to provide it.
Canada Should Pay Attention To Access And Agency
Meta's vision has clear upside for Canada.
Canadian entrepreneurs, researchers and smaller businesses could gain access to capabilities they would never be able to finance themselves. If AI lowers the cost of creating companies, learning new skills and developing new products, a smaller economy can participate without matching U.S. frontier model spending dollar for dollar.
Canada is already debating how to keep more domestic intellectual property, capital and compute capacity while using global AI platforms. The country's AI sovereignty debate is partly about preserving enough domestic capability to avoid becoming only a customer of technology developed and controlled elsewhere.
A recent pro-human AI initiative backed by researchers, business and labour groups also argues for human agency, limits on concentrated power and accountability for AI companies. Zuckerberg reaches some similar principles from a very different starting point.
Canada needs enough choice, competition, data control and domestic capability for its companies and citizens to use increasingly powerful AI on their own terms.
Talking Point
Zuckerberg's bet is that superintelligence can give individuals more power to learn, invent, work and build. Meta has the reach and financial capacity to put that idea in front of billions of people. The cost of doing so is already putting heavy pressure on cash flow.Whether users ultimately gain more control will depend on who controls the models, data, compute and rules behind their personal AI.
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 13, 2026 | NCFA Resource | Risk Compliance And Regtech, Artificial Intelligence And Data, Regulation And Policy
Machine Readable Rules For Compliance Systems And AI
On August 6, 2026, the UK Financial Conduct Authority launched the FCA Handbook API, giving firms, developers and RegTech providers direct access to structured Handbook data. The free service lets software retrieve current rules, guidance, technical standards and glossary content for use inside compliance and regulatory change systems.
The practical value is real. Firms no longer have to rely only on website searches, monthly downloads or manually maintained rule libraries when they want FCA source material inside their own systems. The API creates a direct route from the Handbook into software that tracks obligations, maps rules to business activities or supports AI assisted compliance work.
What It Does In Practice
The API provides structured access to the FCA Handbook, Technical Standards and Glossary. Users need a free Handbook account, and the FCA says the data can be used in firms’ own applications or through third party technology providers.
The FCA identifies several practical uses:
mapping rules to products, activities and customer journeys
tracking and comparing current and future Handbook changes
feeding regulatory and policy updates into compliance systems
supporting RegTech products with current FCA source data
providing trusted regulatory content to AI tools
AI can help retrieve, classify and compare regulatory information, but the quality of the output still depends on the source material it receives. A direct FCA data feed reduces one common problem which is compliance tools working from copied, stale or inconsistently maintained rule text.
NCFA has already identified this problem in AI powered regulatory reporting. The opportunity isn't simply to add AI to compliance work. Systems need reliable regulatory inputs, clear controls and a way to trace outputs back to the underlying rule or guidance.
The API can also reduce manual work around regulatory updates. Firms can connect Handbook content to internal rule inventories, product governance, control libraries or change management processes rather than repeatedly checking individual pages for updates.
There are some practical access conditions. Users cannot work with the API directly through the Handbook website. They need a compatible external application such as Postman or RapidAPI, or another system built to use the interface. Protected endpoints are also subject to rate limits.
Who Gets Value
The clearest users are compliance teams, legal teams, RegTech providers, financial institutions and fintechs that need FCA rules inside operational systems.
Large firms with internal technology teams can connect the data to their own compliance architecture and tailor how Handbook content is matched to business lines, products or controls.
Smaller firms may get more value indirectly through RegTech providers that use the API to improve rule monitoring, change alerts, obligation management or policy tools.
Developers and AI teams also gain a cleaner source for regulated workflows. For example, a compliance assistant could retrieve relevant Handbook content, compare current and future text, or help staff identify which internal policies may need review after a rule update.
That doesn't make the API a compliance decision engine. A system can retrieve the rule accurately and still reach a poor conclusion about how it applies to a particular firm, product or client situation. Human review, legal interpretation and internal accountability remain necessary.
Strengths And Limits
The main strength is source quality. The API automatically draws from the latest Handbook rather than requiring firms or vendors to maintain their own copy of the rulebook. That can improve consistency and reduce the delay between a Handbook update and its appearance inside a compliance system.
It is also useful that the FCA has made the service available without a separate licence fee. Firms can choose whether to connect directly or use a technology provider, which lowers the barrier for developers and RegTech companies testing new compliance tools.
The API is not a complete regulatory archive. It does not provide historic Handbook versions. Requests for past dates return an error, although current and future versions are available through the API. Firms that need a full historical record will still need the Handbook website, archive tools or their own retained records.
The API also does not cover every piece of FCA information. The FCA Handbook contains rules, guidance and standards, while other FCA publications, supervisory communications, consultations, speeches and notices remain outside that core source. Compliance systems therefore still need broader regulatory monitoring.
Direct access to current regulatory text improves the input, but it does not guarantee accurate interpretation. Firms using AI for compliance should still test outputs, keep records, control permissions and make it clear when a person needs to review the result. The IOSCO AI Supervisory Toolkit provides useful additional guidance on governance, oversight, data quality and control expectations for AI in regulated financial environments.
The FCA Handbook API is most useful when treated as authoritative source infrastructure. It can make regulatory information easier for software to retrieve and keep current, while firms remain responsible for deciding what the rules mean for their own operations.
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](http://www.ncfacanada.org)
August 12, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Open Banking Open Finance And Data Sharing, Payments Infrastructure And Money Movement, Cross Border Payments And FX
Bank Authentication Modernizes A Familiar Canadian Payment Rail
The Canadian launch is notable because two foreign payment companies are commercializing a Pay by Bank experience here before Canada has a fully operational regulated consumer-driven banking system with payment initiation. Flywire and Trustly are improving how an existing bank payment is authenticated and started rather than waiting for Canada's future open banking payment rails.
The Canadian Payment Still Runs On PAD
Flywire's Canadian payment instructions describe a simple flow. The payer selects Online Bank Transfer in CAD, a Trustly window opens, and the payer signs into their bank. Payment details are filled in automatically and the bank can request additional verification before the payment is authorized.
Flywire says the money is normally debited within 24 hours and delivered to the institution in about five business days. Only personal bank accounts are currently supported. Business and corporate accounts aren't.
The timing tells us the product isn't an instant payment and it isn't using Canada's Real Time Rail. Flywire's own developer documentation identifies its Canadian EFT authorization as a pre-authorized debit agreement (PAD).
Trustly adds the digital layer around that debit, using bank authentication and account data to make the payment easier to initiate inside Flywire.
“Pay by Bank is a term that is too general. Generic essentially. What we really mean is Open Banking-based or -enabled payments over bank rails.”
That description fits the Canadian launch particularly well. The bank rail isn't new. The authentication, data and payment experience around it are what Trustly changes.
Large Payments Give Pay By Bank A Clear Use Case
Flywire specializes in payments where the amount, currency or accounts receivable process can be more complicated than an ordinary checkout. It currently supports more than 5,100 clients across education, healthcare, travel and B2B markets, with payments available in more than 140 currencies across 240 countries and territories.
Its platform processed US$11.4 billion in payment volume during the first quarter of 2026 alone.
Canadian payment options work differently. Flywire lets customers use Interac e-Transfer for payments up to C$3,000, and those payments can arrive quickly. Online bill payment can handle larger amounts, but the payer has to leave Flywire, find Flywire as a biller in online banking and complete the payment there.
Trustly keeps more of that process inside Flywire. The payer signs into their bank and approves the payment without having to set up a biller or copy payment details.
That can be useful for larger payments such as tuition. Flywire hasn't published one Canada-wide Trustly limit, so the amount a payer can send depends partly on the limits set by their bank.
Pay By Bank Is Arriving Before Canadian Open Banking Payments
The terminology needs care because Trustly calls the product an open banking payment while Canada's regulated consumer-driven banking framework is still being implemented.
The federal framework is designed to replace credential sharing with regulated API-based financial data access. Payment initiation, often called write access, belongs to a later phase. As of August 2026, the government is still working on the implementation rules for Canada’s consumer-driven banking framework.
Flywire's Canadian Trustly instructions, by contrast, currently ask the payer to sign into online banking through the Trustly experience. Public documentation doesn't establish that every participating Canadian financial institution is connected through a direct API.
It shows that commercial Pay by Bank services can develop before Canada's regulated framework reaches payment initiation.
The longer-term opportunity gets more interesting when the payment experience and settlement infrastructure improve together. Canada's financial infrastructure is opening to new participants, while the Real Time Rail is intended to bring instant, data-rich clearing and settlement. Flywire and Trustly are showing what fintechs can build above the infrastructure available today.
Talking Point
Flywire and Trustly aren't waiting for Canadian open banking payments to become fully operational. They're bringing an international Pay by Bank model into Canada by adding bank authentication and a cleaner payment experience to PAD infrastructure that already works. For Canadian fintechs, that shows an example of how much product innovation can happen above the payment rail before the rail itself changes.
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 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. 
