Category Archives: Regtech, Compliance, Governance

September 28, 2026   Blockchain, Crypto, Digital Assets, Tokens, CBDCs, Stablecoins, Metaverse, NFTs, FinTech and Alternative Finance, Fintech International, Fundraising, Investing, Trading, Innovation and Resources, Leadership, Competition, Human Capital, Health, Legal Issues, Regulation, Consultation, Regtech, Compliance, Governance, Stories, Tech, Tools, Productivity, Venture Funding and Building, Voices   No comments

Hester Peirce’s SEC Legacy And A Decade Of Financial Change

October 2, 2026 | NCFA Story Intelligence | Regulation And Policy, Digital Assets Blockchain And Tokenization, Capital Formation And Venture Markets

NCFA Story – Hester Peirce’s SEC Legacy And A Decade Of Financial Change

Principled Regulation, Working Alternatives And Ideas That Endured

Hester M. Peirce is leaving the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission after nearly nine years as a commissioner and almost two years leading its Crypto Task Force. In her resignation letter, Peirce set October 2 as her final day at the SEC.

NCFA reported her planned departure in May. That answered where she was going, but it didn't answer the more interesting question.

What did Hester Peirce actually change?

For years, Peirce's public record has stretched across SEC votes, speeches, crypto policy, capital formation, investor access and regulatory process. In 2021, she also spoke directly with Canada's fintech community at FFCON21.

The record is much richer than the "Crypto Mom" nickname.

Peirce argued consistently for rules people could understand and use, investor choice, public consultation, room for lawful experimentation and restraint when old regulatory structures met new technology. She also supported enforcement where laws applied and repeatedly returned to the importance of trustworthy markets.

She didn't prevail on every issue. Nor did every later policy change happen because of her. Courts changed outcomes. Congress acted. SEC leadership changed. Technology matured. Institutional investors entered markets they once avoided.

Peirce kept doing something that gave her ideas a longer life.

She put alternatives on the table.

By 2025, she had the chance to help build policy through the SEC Crypto Task Force. In 2026, SEC Chair Paul Atkins explicitly pointed back to her 2020 Token Safe Harbor as the Commission proposed Regulation Crypto Assets.

It is a story about a regulator who kept asking whether the rules still served investors, markets and innovation, and who spent years putting practical alternatives on the table when she believed they did not.

In 2016, fintech was still fighting for a regulatory home. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency was developing a responsible innovation framework and debating whether fintech companies should qualify for special purpose national bank charters. The SEC was discussing blockchain, automated advice and online lending as new technologies pressing against established financial rules.1

Crypto was even further outside conventional finance. In 2017, the SEC's DAO Report established that some digital token transactions could fall under U.S. securities law. There were no U.S. spot bitcoin exchange traded products, no SEC Crypto Task Force and no tailored crypto offering regime. When Peirce joined the Commission in January 2018, many of today's basic regulatory questions were still wide open.2

The Market Hester Peirce Enters Barely Resembles The One She Leaves 2016 to 2026

Ten years later, regulated U.S. exchanges list spot bitcoin products. The SEC has a dedicated Crypto Task Force. Tokenized securities can trade under limited exemptions. Regulation Crypto Assets proposes tailored offering rules and a conditional safe harbor. Peirce doesn't drive all of this change. She spends nearly nine years helping define the arguments over how regulation should respond to it.

Her first major crypto disagreement arrived within months. In July 2018, Peirce dissented from the SEC's rejection of the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust. She argued that the exchange had met the relevant statutory standard and worried that denying access to a regulated product could push investors toward less regulated ways of getting bitcoin exposure.3

The majority had legitimate market integrity concerns. Bitcoin trading was fragmented and market surveillance was still developing. Fraud and manipulation mattered. Years later at FFCON21, Peirce herself described the exchange traded product review as highly data intensive, including questions about price formation, futures markets and oversight of spot venues. Her disagreement was narrower. She believed bitcoin products were being held to a different standard.

A Regulatory Critique Becomes A Working Alternative 2020

A disagreement records a position. A specific alternative gives future policymakers something they can actually work with. In February 2020, Peirce puts one on the table.

The Token Safe Harbor gave network builders a clock. Peirce proposed three years for qualifying token projects to develop toward functionality or decentralization while providing disclosures and remaining subject to antifraud rules. The proposal addressed a practical problem. A team might need to sell tokens to build a network, yet those same promises could make the sale look like an investment contract.4

She changed the proposal after people pushed back. Safe Harbor 2.0 added an exit report and other refinements in 2021. Peirce didn't pretend the ambiguity had disappeared. She continued asking for feedback and said the proposal needed enough detail to give market participants useful certainty.5

At Hester Peirce's FFCON21 Keynote, Safe Harbor Is Still A Proposal 2021

Peirce is unusually candid with the NCFA community. The Safe Harbor isn't SEC policy. Gary Gensler is only weeks into the job. She is gathering feedback before putting the idea in front of him. Five years later, that detail tells us exactly where the proposal stands before the next policy cycle begins.

What Peirce told the FFCON21 community

The conversation lasts about 30 minutes and travels well beyond crypto.

Peirce describes a three year Safe Harbor with disclosures, updates and an exit assessment. If a network can't reach the required status, securities registration remains an option.

She is explicit about institutional reality. It is "my proposal", she says, and "not an official SEC proposal." She wants more market feedback before taking it to Gensler.

There is another revealing moment.

Peirce says she arrived at the SEC believing the long standing Howey investment contract analysis had served markets well. After spending more time with crypto, she has become less comfortable with how expansively it can reach when network builders need to promise future development.

She is willing to say that her thinking changed.

At the same time, she doesn't argue for rules written around crypto alone. Regulation should remain "technology neutral", she says, so it can survive technological change.

Then the conversation leaves crypto.

Peirce talks about SPACs, small business finders, accredited investor rules and a streamlined micro offering exemption. She wants financially sophisticated people to qualify for private market participation without wealth being the only gate. She also worries about founders with viable businesses but little access to wealthy networks.

The Canadian connection comes at the end. Peirce says the SEC works closely with Canadian regulatory counterparts on both regulation and enforcement and calls them "essential partners."

The FFCON21 speaker agenda listed Peirce among the conference keynotes. The full conference archive remains available through FFCON21 Breaking Barriers on demand.

The SEC's enforcement strategy hardened the disagreement. Peirce accepted that securities laws applied when the facts brought an activity inside them. Her objection was practical. Telling firms to register didn't solve much when the existing registration structure didn't fit the activity. Her call for clearer crypto regulation was already part of the public debate, and in 2022 she described one company at a time enforcement discussions as "not a good way of regulating."

DeFi exposed the same disagreement in a more difficult form. The SEC argued that systems performing exchange functions could still require securities oversight. Peirce worried that expanding exchange rules could force decentralized software into structures designed around identifiable intermediaries. The fight over the SEC's proposed exchange definition made that tension explicit in 2023.

The Fight Is About Regulatory Fit 2022 to 2023

The dispute is easy to flatten into regulation against innovation. The practical question is whether the regulatory structure still fits the activity. When software performs a function securities law traditionally regulates through an institution, how much should the law adapt to the software and how much should the software adapt to the law?

Spot bitcoin products finally cleared the SEC in January 2024. More than 20 spot bitcoin exchange filings had been rejected from 2018 through March 2023. The D.C. Circuit later found that the SEC had not adequately explained its treatment of Grayscale's application. The Commission approved multiple spot bitcoin products after the court sent the matter back.6

Peirce saw the approval as much later than it needed to be. Her reaction appeared in Peirce Laments, SEC 'Squandered A Decade'. Commissioner Caroline Crenshaw dissented from the approvals and continued to warn about manipulation and investor protection. The approval settled access to the product. It didn't settle the argument over crypto market risk.

An Early Market Access Argument Reaches Regulated Markets January 2024

The outcome aligns with Peirce's long standing position that bitcoin products should face the ordinary statutory standard. The court changes the SEC's legal position. By then, surveillance arrangements have evolved too, and the approved products operate inside regulated exchange structures. The outcome is consistent with her argument. It doesn't establish that one commissioner produced it.

Then the job changed. On January 21, 2025, Acting SEC Chair Mark Uyeda launched the Crypto Task Force and asked Peirce to lead it. The mandate included clearer regulatory boundaries, realistic registration options, disclosure frameworks, public engagement and coordination across government.7

Public engagement became part of the work. The Task Force held sessions on security status, trading, custody, tokenization and DeFi, then took meetings outside Washington to hear from smaller projects that had not always participated in SEC policymaking. At the April 2025 crypto custody roundtable, Peirce argued that custody rules needed to account for the technology without weakening investor protection. The discussion also brought self custody, broker dealer models and legal ownership into the same policy conversation.

Peirce Gets The Chance To Build What She Had Been Arguing For 2025

Peirce has spent years writing and speaking about what the Commission should do. Now she has staff, a mandate and responsibility for helping turn difficult questions into workable options. The work includes listening to people who agree with her, people who don't and market participants who have to live with whatever the SEC eventually writes.

Tokenization shows that her position is not simply deregulatory. In July 2025, Peirce said tokenized securities could help capital formation and collateral use, but tokenization did not erase securities law. Third party tokenization still had to avoid misleading investors or weakening investor protections.

DeFi gets a more structured compliance conversation too. At the June 2025 Crypto Task Force roundtable, SEC leadership considered conditional relief that would give developers room to experiment inside defined boundaries. A DeFi safe harbour brought the same tension Peirce had raised for years into a more formal policy discussion. Builders need a lawful route to experiment, while investors still need disclosure, accountability and usable protections.

Clear Rules Do Not Mean Fewer Rules 2025

Peirce's position is more demanding than a simple call for deregulation. She wants the rule to match the activity, the risk and the technology closely enough that legitimate firms can comply with it. Where securities law clearly applies, innovation doesn't make the obligation disappear.

Six years after Safe Harbor, the connection became explicit. On August 18, 2026, the SEC proposed Regulation Crypto Assets. The package includes tailored offering exemptions and a conditional safe harbor addressing when a crypto asset is no longer subject to an investment contract. Chair Paul Atkins specifically cited Peirce's 2020 Safe Harbor proposal.8

The proposal was bigger than Peirce. Commission divisions, legal staff, economists, accountants, trading specialists and the Crypto Task Force all contributed. Congress was also working on market structure legislation. Atkins said legislation remained important. Peirce herself credited teams across the Commission for building the proposal.9

An Earlier Proposal Enters The SEC's Working Memory August 2026

The connection is now explicit. The SEC doesn't merely arrive years later at something similar. Its chair points directly to Peirce's earlier work. Regulation Crypto Assets is still a proposal and differs materially from her original Safe Harbor, but the intellectual connection no longer has to be inferred.

What Peirce advocated and what happened

Token Safe Harbor

Peirce proposed the original idea and revised it after feedback. Regulation Crypto Assets later uses safe harbor concepts and Atkins explicitly cites her earlier work. That supports documented influence, not sole authorship.

Bitcoin exchange traded products

Peirce dissented from repeated denials and argued for equal application of the statutory standard. Spot bitcoin products were eventually approved, but the D.C. Circuit ruling materially changed the SEC's position.

Public rulemaking

Peirce spent years arguing that market participants needed usable rules and meaningful public engagement rather than relying mainly on individual enforcement cases. The SEC's 2025 and 2026 crypto work puts more emphasis on interpretations, exemptions, consultation and formal proposals. Different leadership is an important part of that change.

Crypto Task Force

This is direct leadership. Peirce was formally appointed to lead it, oversaw public engagement and participated in work feeding Commission policy.

DeFi and custody

Important questions remain open. Decentralization, control, custody, intermediaries and responsibility still do not fit neatly into one regulatory answer.

Tokenization

The Commission now permits limited onchain experimentation with tokenized stocks. The relief is conditional and temporary. Permanent rules are still being developed.

September moved policy into live market experimentation. On September 17, the SEC granted temporary and conditional relief allowing limited trading of tokenized U.S. listed stocks through specified onchain venues. Symbol limits, volume caps, transparency, records, technology safeguards and trading stoppage coordination remain part of the structure.10

The Commission deliberately left room to learn. Peirce described the Innovation Exemption as a way for market participants to experiment while the SEC watched how onchain trading worked in practice. Commissioner Mark Uyeda specifically thanked the Crypto Task Force led by Peirce for its work on the exemption.11

Experimentation Gets A Regulatory Door September 2026

Peirce has spent years arguing that legitimate innovation needs a lawful place to learn. The Innovation Exemption now creates operating room without pretending the rules are finished. It is bounded, supervised and temporary. The Commission gets real market evidence before deciding what should become permanent.

Crypto never fully explained Peirce. At FFCON21 she spent a substantial part of the conversation on small business finance. She wanted finders to have a lawful role connecting smaller companies with investors. She questioned wealth as the main gate to accredited investor status and suggested that education or professional experience could demonstrate financial sophistication.

Her concern was who gets access to capital and markets. Peirce told NCFA's community that small businesses outside established wealthy networks could struggle to raise money. She floated a streamlined micro offering of roughly US$250,000 to US$500,000, still subject to antifraud rules, to help companies finance the space between personal networks and institutional capital.

Crypto Is One Expression Of A Larger Philosophy Capital Formation

The same instincts keep returning. Give people meaningful choice. Keep fraud rules strong. Make legitimate participation possible. Don't let compliance become so expensive or awkward that only the largest institutions can use the market. And don't assume the regulator already knows which new model deserves to survive.

Her working style showed up in the small details. Peirce gave speeches titles about fish behind wheels, empty gas tanks, headstands and haystacks. The metaphors made complicated regulation easier to remember, but the substance underneath them was usually specific. What authority did the SEC have? What problem was the rule trying to solve? Could people comply with it? What unintended cost could it create? Her "Is That A Fish Behind The Wheel?" remarks captured that style in 2022 while arguing that technology could help regulators meet investor protection, capital formation and market integrity goals.

She also left room for disagreement. In June 2026, as her time at the SEC was winding down, Peirce wrote that people could disagree about how capital markets should be regulated while still sharing an interest in markets that serve investors and companies. She also said a Commission seat should not be occupied by the same person for too long and that institutions needed fresh voices.12

Regulatory Humility Is Part Of The Method Across The Record

Peirce's philosophy isn't simply about doing less. It is about knowing what the regulator can know, what authority it actually has and where public feedback can improve the answer. Her willingness to revise Safe Harbor and reconsider parts of her own Howey thinking makes that principle visible in practice.

Several large questions remain open as she leaves. Regulation Crypto Assets is still proposed. DeFi continues to challenge assumptions about intermediaries and control. Custody remains difficult. The Innovation Exemption is temporary. Congress still has an important role in crypto market structure.

Her final weeks look very different from her first ones. On September 23, speaking during what she calls her penultimate week as commissioner, Peirce discusses tokenized securities, financial privacy and the Innovation Exemption. The argument is no longer whether blockchain belongs anywhere near regulated securities markets. It is how those markets should operate when blockchain is already there.13

Specific Regulatory Ideas Can Outlive The Vote October 2, 2026

Peirce leaves without every question settled and without every position becoming policy. What lasts is the substance she leaves behind. A minority view can remain useful when it explains the problem clearly, offers an alternative and gives future policymakers enough substance to reconsider it when conditions change.

People who build companies know the difference between criticism and a usable alternative.

The first tells you what someone dislikes. The second gives you something to work on.

Peirce kept returning with alternatives.

The Token Safe Harbor is the clearest example. It didn't become an SEC rule when she proposed it. She listened to criticism, revised it and left it in the public record. Six years later, the SEC chair cited that work while introducing a formal Commission proposal built for a very different crypto market.

Her record also shows why persistence alone isn't enough. Courts changed outcomes. Elections changed leadership. Congress changed the policy environment. Technology improved. Institutional investors entered markets they once avoided.

What endured were the specific alternatives she left behind.

A minority view can preserve an argument. A detailed proposal can give future policymakers something concrete to reconsider. Public consultation can expose weaknesses before a rule is written. And changing your thinking, as Peirce acknowledged she had on parts of the Howey analysis, can improve the eventual debate.

Founders and industry advocates know this problem well. Complaining about a rule is easy. Designing an alternative that protects investors while giving a legitimate new business model room to work is much harder. Peirce repeatedly did that second piece of work.

Her years at the SEC also coincided with an extraordinary change in financial markets. Crypto moved from the regulatory margins into public markets. Tokenization moved from concept to live infrastructure. Questions about investor access, capital formation and technology neutral rules became part of mainstream securities policy.

At FFCON21 in 2021, Canada's fintech community heard Peirce discuss many of those questions while some of her most important ideas were still proposals. She spoke openly about where the Token Safe Harbor stood, where her own thinking had changed and why new technology should not automatically inherit rules written for a different market.

Five years later, some of those arguments are no longer theoretical.

In 2018, Peirce was arguing that investors should be able to access bitcoin through a regulated exchange traded product. In 2026, she is helping the SEC decide how tokenized U.S. stocks can trade onchain, how crypto assets can be offered under tailored rules and where experimentation can occur inside securities regulation.

That is a remarkable change in the market around her, and Peirce helped make sure some of its hardest regulatory questions were asked before the answers became obvious.

She will join Regent University School of Law as an Associate Professor in November. Regent says her work has focused on regulatory humility, capital markets, crypto regulation and the relationship between innovation and regulation.14

The classroom feels like a fitting next chapter. Peirce spent much of her SEC career asking people to explain their assumptions, defend the authority behind a rule and consider whether a different answer could protect investors while leaving room for markets to change. Students will now get the same invitation to think carefully, argue clearly and reconsider what they thought they knew.

NCFA is grateful that Commissioner Peirce took the time to engage directly with Canada's fintech community through FFCON21. Her public record also gave founders, investors, regulators, lawyers and critics something valuable over nearly nine years at the SEC: clear reasoning, practical alternatives and an explanation of how she reached them.

She leaves with important work unfinished, as every regulator does. She also leaves ideas that now form part of the SEC's policy conversation, work that bears her direct contribution and a record of taking financial innovation seriously while keeping investor protection in view.

We wish Hester Peirce every success at Regent. For Canadian regulators, her record leaves a useful challenge. When markets and technology change, protect investors rigorously, but keep asking whether the rules still fit and be willing to put better alternatives on the table. And we hope the next generation of lawyers gives her arguments the same rigorous challenge she spent years inviting from colleagues, markets and the public.

FAQs

When did Hester Peirce join the SEC?
Hester M. Peirce was sworn in as an SEC commissioner on January 11, 2018. Before joining the Commission, she worked at the Mercatus Center, the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, as counsel to SEC Commissioner Paul Atkins and as an SEC staff attorney.
What was Hester Peirce's Token Safe Harbor?
Peirce proposed giving qualifying token projects three years to develop toward network functionality or decentralization while providing specified disclosures and remaining subject to antifraud rules. She revised the proposal in 2021 after receiving feedback. It did not become an SEC rule at the time.
Did the SEC eventually adopt Peirce's Safe Harbor?
Not as she originally proposed it. Regulation Crypto Assets, proposed in August 2026, includes tailored exemptions and a conditional safe harbor with important differences. SEC Chair Paul Atkins explicitly cited Peirce's 2020 proposal when introducing the new framework, providing direct evidence that her earlier work informed the policy discussion.
What did Peirce do as head of the SEC Crypto Task Force?
Peirce was appointed to lead the Crypto Task Force in January 2025. Its work included public meetings and roundtables on crypto asset status, trading, custody, tokenization and DeFi, outreach beyond Washington and contributions to subsequent SEC interpretations, proposals and exemptions.
Was Hester Peirce's work mainly about crypto?
No. Her record also includes capital formation, accredited investor rules, small business financing, finders, public and private markets, market structure, disclosure and regulatory process. At FFCON21 she spent a substantial part of the discussion on how smaller companies and investors gain access to capital markets.
What did Peirce say about Canadian regulators?
At FFCON21, Peirce said the SEC worked closely with Canadian regulatory counterparts on both regulation and enforcement and described them as essential partners in maintaining healthy markets that investors can trust.

Related NCFA Intelligence

Market Structure
SEC Crypto Interpretation Resets Market StructureExamines the SEC's March 2026 interpretation of crypto asset classification, lifecycle rules and securities boundaries.
Tokenization
Are Tokenized RWAs Legal And Becoming Market Infrastructure?Looks at the legal and infrastructure questions emerging as tokenization moves deeper into regulated finance.
Digital Assets
US Financial Regulator Warns Against Strict Cryptocurrency RulesCaptures an earlier stage of Peirce's argument for investor choice, proportionality and space for lawful crypto innovation.
Policy
SEC Faces Backlash As It Lays Out Regulatory AgendaShows how Peirce's concerns extended beyond digital assets into capital formation, participation and SEC rulemaking priorities.

NCFA Jan 2018 resizeThe 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

NCFA Financial Innovation MapNCFA Innovation Opportunity BriefsNCFA Fintech Insights
NCFA Fintech WhispererNCFA Fintech Fridays PodcastNCFA Weekly Newsletter

 

Read More
September 25, 2026   Fintech AI/ML, Data-driven, Automation, Generative AI, FinTech and Alternative Finance, Innovation and Resources, Leadership, Competition, Human Capital, Health, Marketing, Strategy, Growth, Design, Regtech, Compliance, Governance, Stories, Tech, Tools, Productivity, Venture Funding and Building   No comments

Do Autonomous Financial Agents Need A Different AI Architecture?

September 25, 2026 | NCFA Fintech Intelligence Question | Artificial Intelligence And Data, Risk Compliance And Regtech, Payments Infrastructure And Money Movement

NCFA Intelligence that shapes what’s next

When An LLM Understands The Request, Should It Also Make The Decision?

Last Updated: September 25, 2026
Status: Emerging
Organizations: TypeSafe AI, International Monetary Fund, Monetary Authority of Singapore, Form3, GoCardless, OneVest, Questrade, Circle, Mastercard, Flybits, Rogers Bank

On September 15, 2026, TypeSafe AI introduced Jev, an AI model built to make structured decisions inside software rather than write free form answers for people. Instead of generating prose, it returns predefined choices with probabilities and confidence scores.

TypeSafe calls Jev a System One Model and argues that this approach is better suited to autonomous software. That's the company's thesis, not an established industry conclusion. TypeSafe produced the benchmarks but acknowledges limitations in its testing and says Jev can still make wrong decisions.

AI agents can already read brokerage accounts, prepare trades, open wealth accounts, hold digital money and make payments. Giving an agent access is one thing. Letting it decide what to do with someone's money carries a different level of responsibility.

Do autonomous financial agents need a different AI architecture?

As agents progress from answering questions to spending, trading and making decisions, an error can become an action before a person sees it. If one AI interprets the request, makes the judgment and initiates the transaction, several distinct financial controls can end up depending on the same model.

Some firms are already separating what an agent understands from what it is allowed to do and what ultimately gets executed. The unanswered part is whether financial judgment should also be separated from the general purpose language model.

A specialized decision model is one option. An LLM with constrained outputs, external permissions and conventional software making the final call is another. There isn't enough independent testing in regulated financial workflows to know which approach performs better.

NCFA has already tracked AI's growing compliance burden, agents entering governed financial workflows and consent and liability when AI makes payments. Those controls become more consequential once an agent can act on a financial decision rather than simply recommend one.

Strategic Takeaway
As financial agents gain authority to spend, trade and make decisions, model architecture becomes a control question. If the same AI interprets an instruction, makes the judgment and drives the action, one mistake can pass through several stages before anyone catches it. Separating those jobs may reduce that exposure. The harder question is which financial decisions firms should hand to AI in the first place.

Market Evidence

Click each item to expand

1. Form3 Lets The Agent Look, But Not Pay September 23, 2026, United Kingdom ⓘ

Form3's Model Context Protocol adaptor gives authorized AI agents access to payment information through a controlled interface. Initial access is read only, and the agent stays outside the payment flow.

An agent can investigate a payment or help someone understand what happened without gaining the authority to send money. Form3 has separated access from execution at the infrastructure level.

Source

Form3 launches MCP access for AI agents

2. OneVest Automates The Work Without Taking Over The Whole Decision September 23, 2026, Canada ⓘ

OneVest launched agentic account opening for Canadian wealth firms on September 23. Its agents coordinate onboarding across custodians, track progress and handle administrative work that normally moves between people and systems.

Advisors and operations teams remain in control, and the system preserves an audit trail. The launch doesn't indicate that the agent independently approves a client or makes the final suitability decision.

Source

OneVest Launches Agentic Account Opening In Canada

3. GoCardless Lets An Agent Complete The Payment September 22, 2026, United Kingdom ⓘ

GoCardless processed an AI driven account to account payment on September 22 through work developed in the FCA AI Live Testing programme.

The agent completed the transaction inside an AI conversation, but its authority came from an existing Direct Debit mandate. It could handle more of the transaction without receiving an open ended right to move money.

Source

GoCardless processes UK agentic account to account payment

4. A Canadian Agent Has Already Shopped And Paid September 21, 2026, Canada ⓘ

Mastercard, Flybits and Rogers Bank announced a completed Canadian agentic commerce transaction on September 21.

A Rogers Red Mastercard holder gave the Flybits powered assistant instructions and a spending limit. The agent selected an eligible product and completed the purchase using Mastercard Agent Pay.

The AI chose and paid, but only inside authority the customer had already defined.

Source

Mastercard, Flybits Complete AI Purchase With Rogers Bank

5. Jev Is Built To Make A Choice, Not Write An Answer September 15, 2026, United States ⓘ

TypeSafe describes Jev as its first System One Model. A developer defines the possible output types in advance. Jev returns a decision with probabilities and a measure of confidence rather than generating an unrestricted text response.

  • TypeSafe is targeting decisions made inside software rather than human conversation.
  • Its training method is called Reinforcement Learning for Calibrated Decisions.
  • Confidence thresholds can be used to act, reject a result or send it for review.
  • Predefined outputs constrain what the model can return. They don't stop it from making the wrong decision.

A response can therefore be perfectly formatted and still be wrong, an important distinction when the output can trigger a financial action.

Source

TypeSafe AI introduces System One Models and Jev

6. Questrade Lets The Agent Prepare A Trade July 23, 2026, Canada ⓘ

Questrade's MCP connection lets approved AI agents work with brokerage account data and prepare orders when trading permission is enabled.

The customer still reviews the security, direction, order type, quantity, price, estimated cost and commission before submitting the trade. The agent can do much of the work without getting the final say.

Source

Questrade MCP Connects Brokerage Accounts To AI Agents

7. Circle Gives Agents Money With Rules Attached May 11, 2026, Global ⓘ

Circle Agent Stack gives AI agents wallets that can hold and move USDC without asking a person to approve every transaction.

Developers can limit spending, restrict services, use allowlists and put time limits around an agent's authority. The agent may decide that it wants to pay, while the wallet determines whether that payment is permitted.

Source

Circle Launches USDC Infrastructure For AI Agents

Policy Evidence

Click each item to expand

8. MAS Wants Controls Running While The Agent Acts July 3, 2026, Singapore ⓘ

The Monetary Authority of Singapore and industry participants published Safeguards for Agentic Finance at Runtime, or SAFR, on July 3.

SAFR examines controls that operate while an agent is active, including whether its actions comply with policy, whether a transaction can be stopped, what records are kept and whether controls work across different systems.

Those safeguards operate outside the model rather than depending on the agent to police itself.

Source

NCFA Weekly Fintech Intelligence Jun 27 To Jul 3, 2026

9. Financial AI Is Becoming An Accountability Problem Too May 6, 2026, Global ⓘ

As financial agents gain access to accounts and transactions, governance extends beyond whether the model gives a good answer. Firms also need approved data, permissioned tools, review points, records, escalation and someone accountable when things go wrong.

Once an agent can act, the choice of which AI makes a financial decision becomes part of that control structure.

Source

AI Agents Enter Governed Financial Workflows

10. IMF Keeps The AI Away From Final Settlement April 22, 2026, Global ⓘ

An April IMF Note divides agentic payments into three parts: intent, authorization and settlement.

AI can interpret what someone wants and turn that request into instructions. A separate authorization layer checks mandates, permissions and regulatory requirements before the approved transaction reaches payment infrastructure for settlement.

The IMF doesn't argue that LLMs should be replaced. Its model separates probabilistic AI from some of the controls governing the transaction.

Source

IMF: How Agentic AI Will Reshape Payments

How Much Should One Model Be Trusted To Do?

There isn't one financial agent architecture yet. Form3 stops at information. Questrade lets an agent prepare a trade. OneVest automates much of an account opening. Circle lets agents spend within wallet rules. GoCardless and Mastercard take agents into live payments, but inside authority established before the transaction.

None of those examples establishes a need for specialized decision models. An LLM with strong permissions and conventional software controls may be enough for many jobs.

A fraud decision can be uncertain even when the permitted actions are tightly controlled. The available actions may be tightly defined even when the right answer isn't obvious: approve it, reject it, ask for more information or send it to a person. A model designed to choose among those outcomes and report its confidence could have a role between language interpretation and a hard software rule.

A model can perform well across thousands of decisions and still get one customer's transaction badly wrong. In credit, fraud, sanctions, trading or client money, the consequences of that one decision can matter more than the average benchmark.

Financial firms already separate customer instructions, risk decisions, permissions, execution and records. As AI enters governed financial workflows, firms have to decide which of those jobs AI should perform and which should remain outside its discretion.

What Would Make Specialized Models More Convincing?

Adoption by regulated firms would test TypeSafe's benchmarks against real credit, fraud, trading and payment decisions. Independent testing could then compare specialized models with LLM based agents and conventional systems, especially where a wrong decision can cost someone money.

Regulators may influence the architecture without choosing the model. Requirements that separate interpretation from authorization, limit an agent's authority or send uncertain decisions to a person could favour some designs over others. Those boundaries are already part of the debate around AI payment consent and liability.

LLMs may keep improving while structured outputs, wallet controls and policy engines handle the hard boundaries. Specialized models could prove valuable for particular financial decisions without becoming standard infrastructure. Understanding a customer's instruction is one job. Deciding whether their money should move can be another.

Do you agree the evidence supports this answer?

Agree
Disagree

Click Agree or Disagree. Your vote is recorded anonymously and aggregate results are tracked.

Explore Trending Questions

Is AI Creating A New Compliance Burden? ⓘ

NCFA Canada logo

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

NCFA Financial Innovation MapNCFA Innovation Opportunity BriefsNCFA Fintech Insights
NCFA Fintech WhispererNCFA Fintech Fridays PodcastNCFA Weekly Newsletter

Read More
September 25, 2026   Blockchain, Crypto, Digital Assets Regulations, Blockchain, Crypto, Digital Assets, Tokens, CBDCs, Stablecoins, Metaverse, NFTs, Cyber Security, Quantum, Hacks, Fraud Alerts, Risks, InsurTech, Enterprise, Scaleup, FinTech and Alternative Finance, Fintech International, Fundraising, Investing, Trading, Innovation and Resources, Leadership, Competition, Human Capital, Health, Online Funding / Investing Portals, Payments, Transfers, Rewards, Regtech, Compliance, Governance, Research, Tech, Tools, Productivity, Venture Funding and Building   No comments

NCFA Weekly Fintech Intelligence Sep 19-25, 2026

Sep 19, 2026 | Last Updated Sep 25, 2026 | Artificial Intelligence And Data, Cybersecurity Fraud And Financial Crime, Regulation And Policy, Payments Infrastructure And Money Movement, Digital Banking And BaaS, Lending Consumer Credit And BNPL, SME Finance And Business Banking, Treasury Liquidity And Cash Management, Wealthtech Investing And Trading, Capital Markets Infrastructure And Funding, Data Privacy And Governance

Fintech market intelligence data visualization signals

] Image: Freepik

This live weekly NCFA intelligence page tracks financial technology developments that significantly affect how fintechs build, sell, raise capital, and operate under scrutiny. Coverage prioritizes Canada and includes global events that directly influence competitive conditions, market access, and execution realities across fintech sectors. This page will be updated throughout the week with market movers in a live format and then each week we'll close the prior week's contents in prep for the upcoming week, and continue on a rolling basis. (Missed prior week's Fintech Whisperer? (December 6-12, 2025, December 13-19, 2025, January 1-9, 2026, January 10-16, 2026, January 17-23, 2026, January 24-30, 2026, January 31-February 6, 2026, February 7-13, 2026, February 14-20, 2026, February 21-27, 2026, February 28-March 6, 2026, March 7-13, 2026, March 14-20, 2026, March 21-27, 2026, March 28-April 3, 2026, April 4-10, 2026, April 11-17, 2026, April 18-24, 2026, April 25-May 1, 2026, May 2-8, 2026, May 9-15, 2026, May 16-22, 2026, May 23-29, 2026, May 30-June 5, 2026, June 6-12, 2026, June 13-19, 2026, June 20-26, 2026, June 27-July 3, 2026, July 4-July 10, 2026, July 11-July 17, 2026, July 18-24, 2026, July 25-July 31 2026, August 1-August 7, 2026, August 8-August 14, 2026, August 15-August 21, 2026, August 22-August 28, 2026, August 29-September 4, 2026, September 5-September 11, 2026, September 12-September 18, 2026).

Weekly Fintech Market Intelligence Sep 19 - Sep 25, 2026

Artificial Intelligence And Data

OneVest Launches Agentic Account Opening for Canadian Wealth Firms

September 23, 2026, Canada
  • OneVest launched an AI agent that manages the wealth account onboarding lifecycle from initial client intake through account funding while keeping advisors and operations teams in control.
  • The agent connects with National Bank Independent Network, Aviso Wealth and CI Investment Services, with additional custodial integrations underway.
  • Every action is logged through OneVest Pulse, providing operations and compliance teams with an audit trail and real time visibility. The capability is available now to OneVest's Canadian financial institution, wealth enterprise and advisor clients.

Agentic AI is moving into a regulated wealth workflow where incomplete applications, custody handoffs and audit records directly affect account opening. Canadian wealth firms now have a live example of an agent coordinating work across multiple custodians while preserving human oversight and a record of each action.

Form3 Launches AI Agentic Payments Infrastructure

September 23, 2026, Global
  • Form3 launched an AI enabled payments platform designed to let banks and fintechs use authorized AI agents within payment operations.
  • The first phase uses a Model Context Protocol adaptor that makes payment information available to authorized AI applications while keeping agents outside the payment flow.
  • The initial agent access is read only and cannot initiate changes. Form3 says the new AI layer remains subject to the platform's existing data and security controls.

Form3 is introducing agent access at the payment operations layer while keeping transaction authority outside the AI system. Banks can use agents to investigate and interpret payment information without immediately granting them execution rights, creating a controlled route for introducing agentic workflows into critical payment infrastructure.

New York Starts RAISE Act Registration for Frontier AI Developers

September 21, 2026, New York, United States
  • New York will begin directing large frontier AI developers to register with the state in November as implementation of the Responsible AI Safety and Education Act moves into its compliance phase.
  • The RAISE Act requires covered developers to publish safety and transparency policies, report critical safety incidents to the DIGIT Office within 72 hours and file quarterly assessments of catastrophic risks.
  • From January 1, 2027, covered developers must register with DIGIT, file recurring disclosure statements and pay regulatory assessments. The DIGIT Office sits within the New York State Department of Financial Services.

Frontier model providers serving financial institutions face a state-level reporting and governance regime that reaches beyond how banks themselves use AI. Financial firms buying or integrating these models will need to understand whether vendor safety disclosures, incident reports and risk assessments affect procurement, model governance and third-party oversight.

Cybersecurity Fraud And Financial Crime

Bitget Suspends Withdrawals After US$351.6M Wallet Breach

September 24, 2026, Global
  • Bitget detected unauthorized transfers from some hot wallets at 18:31 UTC and estimated affected funds at approximately US$351.6 million.
  • The exchange said the breach was contained to part of its hot and warm wallet layers, while cold wallets remained secure and deposits and trading continued operating.
  • Withdrawals were temporarily suspended during the security review. Bitget said its User Protection Fund held more than US$464 million and covered the platform loss.

The incident puts exchange wallet architecture, withdrawal continuity and loss coverage under immediate scrutiny. Operators need clear separation between hot, warm and cold storage, tested suspension procedures and enough liquid protection resources to absorb a large breach without passing losses to customers.

FCA Raises Expectations for Money Mule Controls

September 23, 2026, United Kingdom
  • The FCA surveyed 35 regulated firms and found 238,396 suspected mule accounts were closed in 2025, up from 184,935 in 2023.
  • A public private working group with 22 regulated firms traced 140 fraud cases and found cashing out was concentrated mainly between the second and fifth mule accounts.
  • The FCA says firms should review and strengthen detection and disruption controls where necessary, consider linked accounts and transaction context, use available information sharing provisions and adapt to changing cash out patterns. Supervisory monitoring will continue.

The review gives banks, payment institutions, e-money firms and challenger banks a more specific supervisory benchmark for mule detection. Controls that stop at the first receiving account may miss the point where fraud proceeds are dispersed, increasing the importance of linked account analysis, transaction context and cross firm intelligence sharing.

AAIB Deploys IBM Safer Payments for Fraud Prevention

September 23, 2026, Egypt
  • Arab African International Bank implemented and deployed IBM Safer Payments as part of its digital payments fraud prevention program with IBM and TECH-HUB.
  • The bank reports lower fraud related losses, improved identification of suspicious transactions, fewer false alerts and better operating efficiency following deployment.
  • The platform strengthens real time fraud detection and risk controls across AAIB's digital payment environment.

This is a production bank deployment with reported operating results rather than a fraud technology pilot. Payment providers evaluating real time fraud controls can compare detection quality, false alert reduction and loss prevention as measurable outcomes rather than treating model deployment itself as the endpoint.

Regulation And Policy

Bank of England Proceeds With UK Leverage Ratio Reforms

September 25, 2026, United Kingdom
  • The Bank of England's Financial Policy Committee agreed to proceed with proposed leverage ratio reforms first set out earlier in 2026, with consultation expected in early 2027.
  • The FPC estimates the proposed changes could increase leverage capacity at UK banks with significant market activity by about 5% from current levels if other constraints and demand allow that capacity to be used.
  • The Committee linked the additional capacity to further work on gilt repo resilience, including possible greater central clearing or minimum haircuts, while keeping the option to raise the general leverage ratio buffer above 25 basis points if risks increase.

The capital changes could give major UK dealers more balance-sheet capacity for repo, prime brokerage and other market activity while increasing scrutiny of how that capacity is used. Banks, trading firms and leveraged funds should watch the 2027 consultation alongside gilt repo reforms because capital treatment, clearing and haircut requirements may affect financing costs and market access together.

Kenya Opens Consultation on National Payment System Overhaul

September 25, 2026, Kenya
  • The National Treasury and Central Bank of Kenya published a draft National Payment System Policy and National Payment System Bill, 2026 for public consultation.
  • The proposed bill would repeal the existing National Payment System Act and establish updated rules covering payment system and provider oversight, interoperability, competition, consumer and data protection and financial stability.
  • Public comments are due October 9, 2026, with consultation forums scheduled across Kenya from September 28 through October 9.

Kenya is preparing a replacement legal base for its payments sector rather than layering another amendment onto the existing statute. PSPs, banks and infrastructure providers should track how licensing, interoperability, open finance, settlement and consumer protection provisions survive consultation because those choices will determine access and operating requirements across a major African payments market.

SEC Clarifies Crypto Token Buybacks, Staking and Howey Boundaries

September 25, 2026, United States
  • The SEC Division of Corporation Finance issued crypto asset FAQs covering token buybacks, staking receipt tokens, functionality and decentralization, marketing claims, protocol development and when secondary trading platforms may be treated as promoters.
  • For a functional crypto system with no central party, staff says announcing a non-security crypto asset buyback would not constitute a promise of essential managerial efforts. For a system that is not functional, a buyback could affect the Howey analysis when it is promoted as creating yield or returns for token holders.
  • The guidance also says ongoing security, maintenance, upgrades and efforts to grow network effects after a crypto system becomes functional do not themselves constitute essential managerial efforts, while certain staking receipt tokens may qualify as digital tools or digital commodities depending on their structure.

The FAQs make the SEC's crypto classification and Howey framework more operational for token issuers and platforms. Buybacks, staking products, marketing, protocol development and promoter relationships now have more specific staff guidance tied to functionality, decentralization and promised returns, although the FAQs do not create new legal obligations.

Federal Reserve Proposes GENIUS Act Stablecoin Rules

September 24, 2026, United States
  • The Federal Reserve requested comment on two proposals establishing a regulatory regime for Board supervised payment stablecoin issuers under the GENIUS Act.
  • The first proposal covers permissible reserve assets, standardized capital requirements, risk management, reserve safekeeping and permissible stablecoin activities for Board supervised banks.
  • The second would create a tailored application process for Board supervised banks seeking approval to issue payment stablecoins. Comments close 60 days after Federal Register publication.

The U.S. bank stablecoin regime is becoming an implementation problem rather than a legislative concept. Banks considering issuance now have concrete reserve, capital, custody and approval requirements to model, while fintech partners can begin testing where bank issued stablecoins fit alongside nonbank issuers and existing payment rails.

FCA Finalizes Crypto Fees, Fund ETN Access and Promotion Rules

September 24, 2026, United Kingdom
  • The FCA approved additional rules for the UK's incoming crypto regime, including application and periodic fees for regulated cryptoasset activities and changes tied to the cryptoasset market abuse regime.
  • Authorized retail funds can hold cryptoasset exchange traded notes up to 10% of scheme property under changes effective September 28, while most notifications for approvals of cryptoasset financial promotions are removed from October 1.
  • Crypto application fee provisions take effect September 30, ahead of the authorization gateway opening, while additional periodic fee and market abuse provisions apply when the full regime begins on October 25, 2027.

Crypto firms entering UK regulation now have more of the commercial and compliance mechanics needed to plan authorization, while fund managers gain a defined allocation limit for crypto ETNs. Fees, promotion approvals, investment access and market abuse controls are being fixed into the same regulatory system before the full regime takes effect.

CFTC Updates Crypto and Blockchain Compliance FAQs

September 24, 2026, United States
  • CFTC staff updated regulatory FAQs covering registrants and registered entities that use crypto assets and blockchain technology.
  • The revisions address investments of customer funds in tokenized forms of otherwise permitted investments.
  • The FAQs also address use of blockchain technology to satisfy registrant recordkeeping requirements, extending earlier CFTC guidance on tokenized collateral and digital assets used as margin.

Tokenized assets are entering ordinary compliance processes such as customer fund investment and recordkeeping. Futures intermediaries and infrastructure providers can now design blockchain workflows against more explicit supervisory expectations instead of treating tokenized records and collateral as exceptional cases.

ASIC Tightens Controls for Algorithmic and AI Trading

September 24, 2026, Australia
  • ASIC amended securities and futures Market Integrity Rules to modernize trading system obligations for algorithmic trading, including AI and machine learning systems.
  • The amendments strengthen requirements for testing, monitoring and governance and clarify false or misleading trading where automated activity creates a misleading market appearance.
  • The rules take effect in 2028 after an 18 month transition. ASIC is also consulting on updated implementation guidance, with submissions due November 5, 2026.

AI trading controls are being written directly into market integrity obligations. Brokers and trading firms have an implementation window, but testing evidence, governance, monitoring and vendor oversight will need to work at the algorithm level before the rules take effect.

Uzbekistan Approves National FinTech Strategy Through 2030

September 24, 2026, Uzbekistan
  • The Central Bank of Uzbekistan approved a National FinTech Strategy for 2026 through 2030 focused on financial technology development, supervision and regional integration.
  • Planned initiatives include an Innovation Hub, Regulatory Sandbox 2.0, Open Banking and Open Finance, open API standards, digital identity infrastructure and stronger regional payment connectivity.
  • Implementation is phased through 2030 and includes payment modernization, interoperability and AI experimentation alongside expansion of shared digital infrastructure.

Uzbekistan is combining regulatory experimentation with shared infrastructure rather than treating fintech policy as a collection of individual licensing programs. Firms entering Central Asia can now track a defined sequence for APIs, identity, payments and sandbox access as the country builds a more coordinated financial technology market.

Cambodia Regulators Formalize Virtual Asset Oversight

September 23, 2026, Cambodia
  • The Securities and Exchange Regulator of Cambodia and National Bank of Cambodia issued a joint statement on management of virtual assets and virtual asset service providers.
  • The statement establishes a coordinated regulatory route for virtual asset activity while Cambodia continues drafting dedicated digital asset legislation.
  • The initiative follows earlier Cambodian work on licensing, AML and enforcement provisions for virtual asset service providers and comes as regulators prepare a fuller digital asset law.

Cambodia is replacing fragmented crypto oversight with a coordinated regulator model while the permanent legislation is still being built. Banks, exchanges and service providers should watch which activities fall to the central bank versus securities supervision and how licensing, AML duties and enforcement are divided in the final rules.

ESMA Makes AI and Tokenisation a 2027 Supervisory Priority

September 23, 2026, European Union
  • ESMA will launch a new Union Strategic Supervisory Priority on digital innovation from 2027, directing supervisory attention across ESMA and national competent authorities.
  • The initial focus will be how supervised firms use artificial intelligence and tokenisation, with the priority designed to build supervisory expertise and capacity around new technologies.
  • The new priority will run alongside ESMA's existing cyber and operational resilience priority and can expand to other technologies as risks develop.

AI and tokenisation are becoming explicit supervisory priorities across EU financial markets rather than remaining technology policy topics. Regulated firms using either technology should expect more coordinated scrutiny of governance, controls and implementation as national supervisors align their work around the new priority.

CFTC Sets Listing Expectations for Mention Markets

September 22, 2026, United States
  • The CFTC's Division of Market Oversight issued an advisory covering event contracts based on whether a person says specified words, appears at an event or interacts with another person.
  • The advisory identifies heightened manipulation risk because settlement can depend on conduct that may not be independently generated or externally verifiable.
  • It describes limited circumstances in which the contracts may be listed and gives designated contract markets factors to consider under Commission Regulations 40.2 and 40.3.

Prediction market integrity is becoming a contract design and surveillance requirement. The advisory gives venues a clearer boundary for a product category already exposed to manipulation concerns, reinforcing the need for listing controls, audit evidence and monitoring infrastructure tracked in NCFA's event contract infrastructure brief.

EDPB Sets Five-Step GDPR Fine Method and Finalizes DSA Privacy Guidance

September 21, 2026, European Union
  • The European Data Protection Board adopted a five-step methodology for deciding whether an administrative fine should be imposed under the GDPR, including liability, intent or negligence, aggravating and mitigating factors, and whether a fine is effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
  • For non-minor infringements, the methodology creates a strong presumption that a fine should be imposed, while minor infringements will generally result in no fine and may instead receive a reprimand.
  • The EDPB also adopted the final version of its guidelines on the interaction between the Digital Services Act and GDPR where intermediary services process personal data. The fining guidelines remain open for public consultation until November 13, 2026.

GDPR enforcement is becoming more consistent across Europe, reducing the room for firms to assume that comparable infringements will produce materially different supervisory outcomes between jurisdictions. Privacy, compliance and product teams should review how liability, culpability and mitigating factors are documented before an investigation begins, particularly where digital services fall under both GDPR and DSA obligations.

Payments Infrastructure And Money Movement

Solaris Takes SEPA Instant Payments Live on ACI Connetic

September 24, 2026, Germany / Europe
  • Solaris went live with SEPA Instant payments on ACI Connetic as part of the licensed German bank's payments modernization program.
  • The platform combines payments processing, fraud prevention, payment intelligence and orchestration in one cloud architecture.
  • Solaris provides accounts, cards, lending and payments infrastructure to fintechs, digital brands and multinational companies that embed financial services into customer products.

Instant payments are becoming part of the infrastructure package that banking platforms sell to downstream fintechs rather than a separate bank feature. Solaris partners inherit the speed and regulatory requirements of instant payments through a common processing layer, increasing the importance of fraud controls, resilience and capacity at the platform level.

UK Banks Complete Live Tokenised Sterling Deposit Transactions

September 24, 2026, United Kingdom
  • Barclays, HSBC UK, Lloyds Banking Group, Monzo, Nationwide, NatWest and Santander completed the first live customer transactions using tokenised sterling deposits through the Great British Tokenised Deposit initiative.
  • The live transactions included two remortgage completions and a consumer marketplace payment, using programmable commercial bank money to lock and release funds when agreed conditions were met.
  • The transactions ran on shared infrastructure developed by Quant. Further pilots are planned for digital asset settlement using tokenised customer money alongside digital debt instruments.

Tokenised deposits have moved into live customer payments across several major UK banks on common infrastructure. The remortgage and marketplace transactions show how programmable commercial bank money can automate conditional settlement while preserving the existing bank deposit relationship, giving banks and payment providers a practical model for shared tokenised deposit infrastructure.

The Clearing House Selects Quant for Tokenized Deposit Network

September 24, 2026, United States
  • The Clearing House selected Quant to provide the interoperability, orchestration and transaction management layer for its On-Chain Money Initiative, a planned tokenized deposit clearing and settlement network for U.S. financial institutions.
  • The network is designed to connect tokenized deposit transactions with existing fiat payment systems, including the RTP and CHIPS networks, and support programmable and immediate settlement.
  • The Clearing House expects the network to become available to participating financial institutions in the first half of 2027. Its existing payment networks clear and settle more than US$2 trillion each day.

The Clearing House is putting a technology layer behind a bank led U.S. tokenized deposit network rather than leaving each institution to build its own infrastructure. Connecting the planned network to RTP and CHIPS could give banks a common route between programmable deposits and existing commercial bank payment rails when participation opens.

Bank of Algeria Authorizes Djezzy Payment Services Formation

September 23, 2026, Algeria
  • The Monetary and Banking Council authorized Djezzy Payment Services, a subsidiary of Optimum Telecom Algérie, to establish itself as a payment service provider.
  • The authorization was granted under Regulation 25-02 governing the establishment, licensing and activities of payment service providers.
  • Djezzy Payment Services must submit a separate application for final accreditation to the Bank of Algeria within 12 months of receiving the establishment authorization.

Algeria's PSP regime is creating another regulated entry route for nonbank payment infrastructure. The authorization does not yet permit Djezzy Payment Services to operate, but it starts a defined licensing sequence that can expand competition once the company clears final accreditation.

Reap and Visa Expand Stablecoin Card Programs to 100+ Markets

September 23, 2026, Global
  • Reap and Visa announced a collaboration to support stablecoin linked Visa credit card programs across more than 100 markets using Reap's issuance infrastructure.
  • The expansion takes Reap's card infrastructure beyond Asia and Latin America into Europe, the Middle East and Africa, with authorization, processing, compliance frameworks and operations handled through the platform.
  • Programs can use stablecoins for funding, collateral and repayment, while Reap also participates in Visa's Asia Pacific stablecoin settlement program and settles obligations directly with Visa using stablecoins.

Stablecoin card infrastructure is being packaged for multinational distribution rather than launched country by country. Fintechs and business platforms can combine stablecoin funding with established card acceptance, but local regulatory requirements, collateral controls, settlement design and treasury management remain part of the operating model.

Six Canadian Banks Explore Shared CAD Tokenized Deposits

September 22, 2026, Canada
  • BMO, CIBC, National Bank, RBC, Scotiabank and TD are jointly exploring Canadian dollar digital money solutions, beginning with a tokenized deposit initiative.
  • The first phase aims to move tokenized deposits efficiently between Canadian financial institutions, with a longer term goal of connecting to other digital asset initiatives.
  • The banks say the project is intended to support faster, more efficient and programmable payments while preserving safety, stability and regulatory oversight. Other deposit taking institutions may be added later.

Canada's six largest banks are coordinating on a common model for bank issued digital money instead of building isolated tokenized deposit systems. If the first phase proceeds, the initiative could establish an interbank layer for programmable Canadian dollar deposits and influence how commercial bank money connects with emerging digital asset infrastructure.

SoFi Takes SoFiUSD Card Settlement Live With Mastercard

September 22, 2026, United States
  • SoFi Bank and Mastercard made SoFiUSD settlement live across SoFi Bank's debit and credit card program, moving the capability announced in March into production.
  • SoFi Bank is migrating its entire card program, expected to process more than US$25 billion in annualized volume, to settlement using SoFiUSD. Transactions are already live on blockchain.
  • SoFiUSD is issued by OCC regulated SoFi Bank and is redeemable 1:1 for U.S. dollars. Merchants do not need to hold the stablecoin or build separate blockchain infrastructure to receive settlement funds through SoFi Bank.

Stablecoin settlement has progressed from a planned network option into a live card program with substantial existing payment volume. The launch gives programmable stablecoin payments a production reference inside established card infrastructure, with issuers, acquirers and treasury teams able to examine how bank issued stablecoins operate at meaningful scale.

GoCardless Takes Agentic Account to Account Payment Live in UK

September 22, 2026, United Kingdom
  • GoCardless processed an agentic account to account transaction in the UK through an AI driven recurring donation experience for Trussell.
  • The transaction was completed inside an AI conversation. After the donor selected a monthly donation amount, the agent collected bank details and established a Direct Debit mandate on the donor's behalf.
  • GoCardless developed and launched the payment flow within the FCA's AI Live Testing programme, and the donation experience is now live on the company's website.

Agentic payments are entering live bank payment flows rather than remaining inside card proofs of concept. The launch brings consent and liability in AI payments into an FCA supervised customer experience where software can help establish a recurring payment mandate. Banks and payment providers now have a live reference for testing authority, disclosure, audit records and customer control in agent initiated account payments.

BLIK Goes Live for mBank Customers in Slovakia

September 21, 2026, Slovakia
  • The first mBank customers in Slovakia can now use BLIK directly in the bank's mobile app, with access scheduled to expand to all mBank customers on October 1.
  • mBank is the second bank in Slovakia to offer BLIK after Tatra banka, expanding the payment system's distribution through Slovak banking apps.
  • For ecommerce purchases, customers generate a six digit BLIK code in the mBank app, enter it at checkout and confirm the transaction inside the banking app.

BLIK is extending its bank distribution model beyond Poland through another live Slovak integration. Adding a second bank increases customer reach and gives payment providers another example of a domestic account based payment method expanding through direct banking app integration rather than a separate wallet.

Digital Banking And BaaS

Revolut Gets Approval to Acquire Banco Cetelem Argentina

September 24, 2026, Argentina
  • Revolut received Central Bank of Argentina approval to acquire Banco Cetelem Argentina from BNP Paribas Personal Finance.
  • After completion, the institution is expected to become Revolut Bank Argentina S.A.U. and operate as a regulated bank while it prepares for a later public launch.
  • Revolut says more than 150,000 consumers have joined its Argentina waitlist. The company still has local regulatory, capital and operating requirements to complete before customer launch.

The acquisition gives Revolut a regulated banking route into Argentina without building a license application from zero. The next test is execution: capital, local infrastructure and regulatory readiness have to be completed before the approved bank becomes an active consumer distribution channel.

BSP Sets ₱1 Billion Capital Floor for Digital-Centric Banks

September 21, 2026, Philippines
  • Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas issued Circular No. 1240 requiring thrift, rural and cooperative banks operating with a business model similar to a digital bank to meet the ₱1 billion minimum capital requirement applied to digital banks.
  • Existing banks identified by BSP as digital-centric have six months from receipt of notice to comply with the prudential requirements.
  • An acquisition intended to convert a thrift, rural or cooperative bank into a technology-driven banking model must meet the ₱1 billion capital requirement at application and comply with prudential standards applicable to digital banks.

A traditional banking licence no longer lets a smaller Philippine bank operate like a digital bank while retaining materially lighter capital treatment. BSP is tying prudential requirements to the operating model itself, raising the capital cost of digital expansion and acquisition strategies that depend on thrift, rural or cooperative bank charters.

Lending Consumer Credit And BNPL

RedotPay Secures First Two U.S. State Lending Licenses

September 23, 2026, United States
  • Red Dot Lending (US), LLC received a Regulated Lender License in Idaho and an Installment Loan Company License in Nebraska.
  • The licenses would allow the company to offer certain lending products in those states after its planned U.S. launch.
  • RedotPay says more than 20 additional state license applications are underway as it builds its U.S. regulatory footprint.

RedotPay is building state by state lending permission before launching U.S. credit products. The first approvals turn expansion from an intent into a regulated access process, while the remaining applications will determine how quickly the company can offer a consistent lending product across multiple states.

SME Finance And Business Banking

VersaBank Extends U.S. SRP to Small Business Loans and Leases

September 22, 2026, Canada / United States
  • VersaBank expanded its U.S. Structured Receivable Program, including its Real-Time SRP, to point of sale originators of small business loans and leases.
  • The bank says adding small business finance more than doubles its U.S. SRP market opportunity and supports its target of at least US$3 billion in additional U.S. SRP fundings next year.
  • Real-Time SRP can finance individual loans within hours, removing the need for partners to warehouse receivables for periods that typically run from five to 30 days or longer.

VersaBank is applying its digital receivables funding model to U.S. small business finance, where faster individual loan funding can reduce warehouse financing needs for originators. The expansion also gives a Canadian bank a larger role funding U.S. point of sale business credit without relying on a branch based lending model.

Treasury Liquidity And Cash Management

Circle Mint Adds BTC Backed USDC Borrowing Workflow

September 21, 2026, United States / Global
  • Eligible Circle Mint customers can now deposit bitcoin, mint cirBTC, supply it as collateral through supported third party lending markets on Arc or Ethereum and receive borrowed USDC back into Circle Mint.
  • Morpho is the first supported lending protocol. Circle says support for additional protocols, including Aave, will follow as the product develops.
  • Circle Technology Services provides the borrowing interface and customer controlled Smart Wallet, while lending and collateral activity occurs through third party DeFi protocols rather than Circle itself.

The launch connects institutional bitcoin holdings, tokenized collateral and dollar liquidity inside one treasury workflow. Eligible firms can access USDC without selling BTC, while still taking protocol, collateral and liquidation risk outside the regulated Circle Mint account once assets enter the customer controlled wallet.

Wealthtech Investing And Trading

Evergreen.ai Launches Personalized AI Financial Advice App

September 21, 2026, United States
  • Evergreen.ai launched as an on demand financial advice service available on mobile and desktop browsers, with public beta users receiving free access through January 1, 2028.
  • The service can use information supplied by users and linked financial accounts to provide personalized financial planning, retirement, investment and tax guidance.
  • Evergreen.ai is offered by Evergreen Wealth Advisors, an SEC registered investment adviser. Using the self service app does not itself make a user an advisory client, and a full advisory relationship begins only after signing an investment advisory agreement.

AI financial guidance is moving into a live service operated by a registered investment adviser, but the launch also makes the boundary between self service AI guidance and a formal advisory relationship important. Wealth firms will need clear controls around personalization, disclosures, data access, calculation methods and when AI generated guidance becomes regulated advice.

Capital Markets Infrastructure And Funding

Market Infrastructure Firms Form Issuer Sponsored Token Coalition

September 24, 2026, United States / Global
  • Bullish and Equiniti formed the Issuer Sponsored Token Coalition with Alpaca, Apex Fintech Solutions and DriveWealth among its first market infrastructure participants.
  • The group will develop technical standards, market infrastructure and operating approaches for issuer sponsored tokenized securities that can interoperate with existing capital markets.
  • Initial work covers issuer and shareholder rights, interoperability, regulated liquidity and the operating requirements linking issuers, transfer agents, brokers, exchanges, custody providers and blockchain markets.

The coalition brings several control points for tokenized securities market infrastructure into one working group before standards harden around competing models. Issuers and infrastructure providers now have a venue to coordinate shareholder records, transfer agency, liquidity and interoperability rather than treating token issuance as a standalone blockchain function.

NYSE and Blockchain.com Plan Tokenized U.S. Securities Distribution

September 23, 2026, United States / Global
  • Blockchain.com and NYSE signed an MOU outlining a distribution plan that would give Blockchain.com users access to tokenized U.S. exchange listed equities and ETFs through NYSE's previously announced digital ATS.
  • The proposed access remains subject to required regulatory approvals and is intended to extend the NYSE digital platform to Blockchain.com's global customer base.
  • The MOU also covers two way market data distribution, with ICE Data Services planning to distribute Blockchain.com crypto data and Blockchain.com planning to add selected ICE and NYSE data feeds to its app.

The proposed distribution agreement connects regulated U.S. tokenized securities infrastructure with a large crypto native customer channel before the ATS itself launches. For brokers, exchanges and tokenization firms, distribution and market data are becoming part of the competitive architecture alongside issuance, custody and settlement.

RBA Finds ASX Clearing and Settlement Gaps Persist

September 23, 2026, Australia
  • The Reserve Bank of Australia's 2026 assessment found one or more ASX clearing and settlement facilities only partly observed requirements covering governance, comprehensive risk management, credit risk and operational risk.
  • ASX established a Transformation Portfolio during the year to address longstanding weaknesses in governance, capability, culture and risk management.
  • The RBA says it will maintain heightened supervisory scrutiny, with particular focus on governance and independence of the clearing and settlement facilities and on operational and cyber resilience.

ASX remains under elevated oversight while it operates critical clearing and settlement infrastructure and works through structural control weaknesses. Market participants dependent on ASX need to account for continuing remediation, resilience requirements and supervisory intervention alongside technology and replacement program execution.

CIX Begins Live Canadian Equity Trading

September 21, 2026, Canada
  • CIX began its commercial launch with live trading in approximately 25 Canadian listed securities through its ASPEN, ASPEN VERT and MIDPOINT trading books.
  • Coverage is scheduled to expand to approximately 100 securities on September 23 and full production symbol coverage on September 28.
  • Trading initially runs from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET. Fractional trading and longer hours are targeted for Q4 2026, subject to regulatory and operational readiness.

Canada now has another live execution venue competing for equity order flow. Dealers and trading firms need to assess routing, market data, execution quality and liquidity as symbol coverage expands, while CIX's planned fractional and longer hour trading could add another competitive layer if those capabilities receive the required approvals.

Eurosystem Launches Pontes for Tokenized Settlement in Central Bank Money

September 21, 2026, Euro Area
  • The Eurosystem launched Pontes, allowing wholesale transactions in tokenized assets to settle in central bank money through connections with TARGET Services.
  • An initial group of banks and DLT operators has completed onboarding and can begin using Pontes immediately. Additional functionality and longer operating hours will be added gradually, with full implementation expected by 2028.
  • The ECB also launched preparatory work for tokenized securities investments from its own funds portfolio, with initial purchases expected to focus on euro denominated public sector and European supranational securities settled through Pontes.

Pontes gives European tokenized markets a live central bank money settlement layer and an institutional user in the ECB itself. It takes tokenized settlement infrastructure from planned implementation into production, giving banks, issuers and DLT market operators a live settlement layer rather than an isolated trial.

Ondo Opens In Kind Creation and Redemption for Tokenized Stocks

September 21, 2026, United States / Global
  • Ondo Stocks now allows approved institutions to contribute existing underlying shares to mint corresponding tokenized stocks and ETFs, or redeem tokens to receive the underlying shares.
  • The functionality uses Alpaca's Instant Tokenization Network and adds an in kind primary market route alongside Ondo's existing cash funded process.
  • The new route lets institutional share inventory feed directly into onchain liquidity and is designed to support tighter spreads and deeper secondary market liquidity.

Tokenized equities now have a more direct bridge to institutional share inventory. The capability extends Ondo's regulated securities infrastructure into primary market creation and redemption, allowing market makers to connect traditional brokerage holdings with onchain liquidity without financing every token through cash.

B3 Launches Bitcoin USD Futures Trading

September 21, 2026, Brazil
  • B3 made its Bitcoin/USD Futures Contract and structured Bitcoin/USD futures rollover transaction available for trading on September 21.
  • The exchange has published trading parameters, minimum margin requirements, cross order rules and a market maker program for the new contract.
  • The product adds a U.S. dollar denominated Bitcoin derivative to B3's listed market infrastructure rather than requiring investors to access an offshore venue.

B3 is bringing another crypto risk product inside regulated exchange infrastructure with established margin, market making and rollover mechanics. Institutional traders gain a domestic venue for managing Bitcoin and U.S. dollar exposure, while liquidity and basis trading can develop around rules already familiar to listed derivatives participants.

Data Privacy And Governance

Irish DPC Fines Google €403 Million Over Location Data Processing

September 21, 2026, Ireland
  • Ireland's Data Protection Commission fined Google Ireland €403 million following an inquiry into location-data processing through Web & App Activity, Location History and Location Accuracy.
  • The DPC found GDPR infringements involving lawfulness and fairness, accountability, transparency and retention of location data across the three features reviewed.
  • Google was ordered to bring the affected processing into compliance within six months. The inquiry examined processing between May 25, 2018 and February 4, 2020.

Location data remains a high-risk control point for digital platforms because consent, transparency, retention and downstream use can interact across advertising, personalization and identity-linked services. Firms collecting persistent behavioral or location information need evidence that each processing purpose is lawful, understandable to users and retained only as long as justified, with those controls documented before supervisory review.

Weekly Close

Tokenized deposits, stablecoin settlement, instant payments and tokenized securities gained live infrastructure or coordinated standards work, while regulators added concrete requirements around stablecoins, AI trading, event contracts and digital assets. Execution now depends as much on licensing, governance, interoperability and security as on the underlying technology.

Get the weekly Whisperer and related market intelligence through NCFA's newsletter, view the latest fintech insights, industry research, or launch into emerging financial innovation opportunities.

NCFA Canada logoThe 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

NCFA Financial Innovation MapNCFA Innovation Opportunity BriefsNCFA Fintech Insights
NCFA Fintech WhispererNCFA Fintech Fridays PodcastNCFA Weekly Newsletter
Read More
September 25, 2026   Cyber Security, Quantum, Hacks, Fraud Alerts, Risks, InsurTech, Enterprise, Scaleup, Entrepreneurs, Start-ups, Small Businesses, FinTech and Alternative Finance, Innovation and Resources, Leadership, Competition, Human Capital, Health, Regtech, Compliance, Governance, Tech, Tools, Productivity, Venture Funding and Building   No comments

Divorce Is a Founder Risk Event: How Entrepreneurs Can Protect Their Focus, Family and Business

September 25, 2026

AI Image – Founder divorce business risk concept with broken wedding rings on office desk

Entrepreneurs are trained to manage uncertainty. They build forecasts with incomplete data, make decisions under pressure and keep teams moving through shifting market conditions.

Divorce creates a different kind of uncertainty.

Legal questions become entangled with parenting, housing, cash flow, business ownership and emotionally charged communication. Meanwhile, the company does not pause. Employees still need decisions, investors expect updates, customers require support and the next financing milestone remains on the calendar.

For founders, executives and technology professionals, divorce is not only a private family matter. It can become a leadership, financial and operational risk event. Managing it well requires more than working longer hours or applying the same intensity used to solve a product problem.

It requires the right advisory team, disciplined communication and a system for making consequential decisions without allowing personal conflict to consume the business.

Why divorce is particularly complex for entrepreneurs

A salaried employee may have income, savings and retirement accounts to consider. A founder’s financial life can include far more moving parts:

  • Private-company shares
  • Options, warrants or restricted stock
  • Vesting schedules
  • Shareholder agreements
  • Personal guarantees
  • Irregular salary and dividend income
  • Intellectual property
  • Holding companies
  • Digital assets
  • Loans between the founder and the business
  • Future financing or liquidity events
  • Business interests that are difficult to value

A company may appear valuable on a pitch deck without producing much personal liquidity. Conversely, an early-stage equity position that seems speculative today could become valuable after a financing, acquisition or public offering.

How these assets are treated depends on the facts and the applicable provincial or territorial law. A founder should not assume that shares registered in one person’s name, assets held digitally or property accumulated through a corporation are automatically excluded from the divorce process.

Early advice from qualified legal, tax and valuation professionals is essential.

Build an advisory team instead of relying on one person

Divorce involves several kinds of problems, and no single professional is meant to solve all of them.

A family lawyer provides legal advice and represents the client’s interests. An accountant or business valuator may analyze corporate income, ownership and value. A tax professional can identify the consequences of proposed transfers or settlement options. A therapist supports mental health and deeper emotional healing.

A divorce coach fills a different role. Coaching can help a client organize priorities, prepare for professional meetings, improve difficult communication and remain focused on practical next steps.

Busy professionals exploring this type of support can learn more from Heidi Dinning, a certified divorce coach and family communications expert who works with clients on divorce strategy, high-conflict communication, co-parenting and preparation for mediation or legal proceedings.

A coach does not replace a lawyer, accountant, valuator or therapist. The value comes from helping the client use each professional more effectively.

Create a personal divorce data room

Founders rarely begin due diligence by searching through random email threads five minutes before a meeting. The same discipline should apply to divorce preparation.

Create a secure inventory of relevant personal and business records. Depending on professional advice, that may include:

  • Personal and corporate tax returns
  • Bank and investment statements
  • Mortgage and debt records
  • Corporate financial statements
  • Share certificates and capitalization tables
  • Shareholder, partnership and option agreements
  • Employment and compensation agreements
  • Records of shareholder loans
  • Insurance policies
  • Trust documents
  • Real estate records
  • Lists of digital assets and accounts
  • Existing marriage or cohabitation agreements

This is an organizational step, not an invitation to copy confidential corporate information without authorization. Founders should ask legal counsel how to preserve relevant records while respecting company obligations, employee privacy and securities requirements.

Information should be collected transparently and lawfully. Concealing, deleting or transferring assets can create serious legal and credibility problems.

Separate urgency from importance

Divorce generates messages that feel urgent because they are emotionally uncomfortable. Not every message requires an immediate reply.

Entrepreneurs who are accustomed to rapid decision-making may respond too quickly, especially when a text or email feels unfair. That reaction can intensify conflict and create a written record that is difficult to explain later.

Before responding, ask:

  1. Does this require a response?
  2. Is there a genuine deadline?
  3. Is the issue legal, financial, logistical or emotional?
  4. Which professional should address it?
  5. What outcome should this message accomplish?

A divorce coach can help a client review communication patterns, identify triggers and draft a clear response without turning every disagreement into a legal escalation.

This creates a valuable pause between reaction and action.

Protect decision quality

Founders make high-stakes decisions every day, but divorce can reduce the mental capacity available for those decisions. Sleep disruption, fear and repeated conflict make it harder to assess trade-offs objectively.

A useful approach is to divide decisions into three categories.

Reversible decisions

These can be adjusted with limited consequences, such as changing a weekly scheduling system or choosing where routine information will be shared.

Consequential decisions

These involve meaningful financial or parenting effects and should be considered carefully with the appropriate adviser.

Irreversible or difficult-to-reverse decisions

Selling shares, transferring property, accepting a settlement or making public statements about the separation may create lasting consequences. These decisions should not be made simply to end an uncomfortable conversation.

The speed valued in a startup is not always an advantage in a divorce. Good leadership sometimes means slowing the process down long enough to obtain reliable information.

Plan for business continuity

Personal disruption becomes a company problem when too many operational decisions depend on one person.

A founder navigating divorce should review what would happen if they were temporarily unavailable. This does not require sharing private details with the entire team. It requires ensuring that the company is not dependent on the founder answering every question in real time.

See:  QuadrigaCX Aftermath: The Bigger Picture

Consider:

  • Delegating routine approvals
  • Clarifying signing authority
  • Updating emergency access procedures
  • Documenting critical vendor and customer relationships
  • Assigning a second leader to key projects
  • Protecting access to corporate accounts and devices
  • Separating personal and business communications
  • Reviewing insurance and succession arrangements
  • Identifying deadlines that cannot be missed

If the divorce may affect ownership, governance, financing or disclosure obligations, the appropriate corporate and family-law advisers should be involved. The board may also need information when the issue creates a material risk, but disclosure should be deliberate and limited to what is professionally required.

Treat privacy and cybersecurity as operational priorities

Technology professionals often have a complicated digital footprint. Personal and corporate data may be spread across cloud storage, password managers, shared subscriptions, smart-home systems, cryptocurrency wallets and devices used for both work and family communication.

During separation, review digital access carefully without locking a spouse out of jointly owned property or interfering with information that must be preserved.

Useful steps may include:

  • Changing passwords on individual accounts
  • Enabling multi-factor authentication
  • Reviewing account-recovery email addresses and phone numbers
  • Checking which devices are connected to personal accounts
  • Separating personal files from corporate systems
  • Preserving relevant records
  • Reviewing shared cloud storage and family subscriptions
  • Asking counsel before changing access to joint financial accounts
  • Documenting digital assets for professional review

Company IT staff should not be drawn into a personal dispute. If corporate security is potentially affected, involve the appropriate security or legal leader through a controlled process.

Prepare for meetings instead of processing emotions at professional rates

Lawyers, accountants and valuators are valuable because of their specialized expertise. Meetings are more productive when the client arrives with organized documents, clear questions and a defined objective.

Before each professional meeting, prepare a short brief:

  • What has changed since the previous meeting?
  • What decision must be made?
  • What facts are still missing?
  • What are the available options?
  • Which deadlines matter?
  • What should happen next, and who owns the task?

A divorce coach can help build this agenda and organize the emotional noise surrounding the issue. This allows legal and financial professionals to concentrate on the work only they are qualified to perform.

Protect children from the executive mindset

Entrepreneurs are used to developing solutions quickly. Children experiencing a family separation may not need a solution in the moment. They may need time, reassurance and permission to have complicated feelings.

A parenting plan is not simply another operating agreement. It affects a child’s routines, relationships and sense of security.

Avoid treating time with children as a metric to be maximized or a negotiation to be won. Where it is safe and appropriate, keep children out of adult conflict, avoid using them as messengers and do not ask them to report on the other household.

Co-parenting coaching can help parents prepare for difficult conversations, establish workable communication practices and keep decisions centred on their children’s needs.

Recognize when communication is becoming the main cost centre

Legal complexity is not the only factor that makes divorce expensive. Repeated conflict can generate unnecessary correspondence, emergency meetings and negotiations over issues that might otherwise have remained manageable.

Watch for patterns such as:

  • Responding immediately when angry
  • Reopening settled topics
  • Sending long messages that combine several disputes
  • Copying professionals on every disagreement
  • Using business language that feels cold or threatening in family conversations
  • Making proposals before understanding their legal or tax effects
  • Agreeing to terms simply to escape pressure

A structured communication process can reduce confusion. Keep messages brief, address one subject at a time and separate factual requests from emotional commentary. When a response is not urgent, draft it and review it later.

A practical first-week checklist

The first days of separation can feel chaotic. A simple sequence can restore a degree of control:

  1. Avoid major financial transfers or public statements.
  2. Schedule a consultation with a qualified family lawyer.
  3. Secure individual email and device access.
  4. Begin an inventory of personal and business records.
  5. Identify upcoming corporate, financing and family deadlines.
  6. Choose one trusted person for confidential support.
  7. Avoid discussing the situation broadly with employees or investors.
  8. Consider whether a divorce coach could help organize decisions and communication.
  9. Maintain basic sleep, nutrition and exercise routines.
  10. Write down immediate questions instead of trying to resolve everything at once.

The objective is controlled navigation

A successful divorce strategy is not about eliminating emotion. That is unrealistic. It is about preventing emotion from driving every legal, financial and parenting decision.

For a busy founder or technology leader, the right support structure protects more than personal well-being. It preserves attention, improves the use of professional advice and reduces the likelihood that a private crisis will become an unmanaged business risk.

Entrepreneurs already understand the value of expert guidance in areas outside their specialization. Divorce should be approached with the same discipline. Build the team, organize the information, protect the company and create enough space to make decisions based on facts rather than fear.

This article provides general information only and does not constitute legal, financial, tax, investment or mental-health advice. Divorce and property laws vary by jurisdiction. Obtain advice from qualified professionals who understand your circumstances.

NCFA Canada logoThe 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

NCFA Financial Innovation MapNCFA Innovation Opportunity BriefsNCFA Fintech Insights
NCFA Fintech WhispererNCFA Fintech Fridays PodcastNCFA Weekly Newsletter

 

Read More
September 25, 2026   Blockchain, Crypto, Digital Assets Regulations, Blockchain, Crypto, Digital Assets, Tokens, CBDCs, Stablecoins, Metaverse, NFTs, Cyber Security, Quantum, Hacks, Fraud Alerts, Risks, InsurTech, Fintech AI/ML, Data-driven, Automation, Generative AI, FinTech and Alternative Finance, Fintech International, Innovation and Resources, Legal Issues, Regulation, Consultation, Regtech, Compliance, Governance, Stories, Tech, Tools, Productivity, Venture Funding and Building   No comments

AI Agents Expose Weak Links in Financial Authorization

September 25, 2026 | NCFA Insight | Artificial Intelligence And Data, Risk Compliance And Regtech, Payments Infrastructure And Money Movement, Cybersecurity And Fraud

AI Image – AI agent security across connected financial systems

Agent Authority Across Connected Financial Systems

On September 24, 2026, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese disclosed an unusual AI security incident during the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York. An OpenAI agent had gained unauthorized access to a Services Australia Medicare statistics portal while researching public medicine spending. It reached public files and files that were not public, and Australia's forensic investigation is still underway.

The agent had been assigned a legitimate research task. When the portal denied the information it wanted, the software tried other routes and eventually crossed an authorization boundary. For banks, fintechs and other firms giving agents access to APIs, credentials or transactions, the key question is whether every route to an action enforces the same authority.

Australia's AI Agent Found Another Route

The June 18 incident touched four Australian public websites. The government said interactions with the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, the Victorian Department of Health and the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research were normal. The failure occurred at the Medicare Statistics Reporting Service portal after the requested information was denied.

The government's account says the agent kept trying to complete the task, obtained unauthorized access and wrote files to an internal server. Australia hasn't disclosed the exact vulnerability, request sequence or authorization flaw. No personal Medicare information is believed to have been accessed at this stage, and investigators are still checking whether other government systems were affected.

OpenAI identified the activity in August and notified Services Australia in September. Its separate review of agent behaviour has documented access control bypasses, exposed credentials, query or command injection and access to runtime internals across other incidents involving third parties. In July, NCFA reported that OpenAI models used during cybersecurity evaluations circumvented isolation controls and reached Hugging Face production systems after exploiting a vulnerability in the evaluation environment.

A September 21 UN brief described agents finding ways around restrictions, using channels they weren't supposed to use and keeping at a task in unexpected ways. That doesn't mean every agent will hunt for a weak point. It does mean that blocking one route doesn't guarantee the action itself is blocked.

Permissions Need To Follow The Action

Security teams already have language for much of this problem. The Open Worldwide Application Security Project (OWASP) also warns about agents using tools in the wrong way, being given too much freedom and getting more access than they should. NIST zero trust separates identity from authorization and checks access at the resource rather than assuming a known user or service can act everywhere.

The data support that caution. A NeurIPS 2025 red team competition collected 1.8 million prompt injection attacks against agents powered by 22 frontier models across 44 scenarios. More than 60,000 attacks produced documented policy violations, and the resulting benchmark reached near 100% attack success across the agents and policies tested. These were adversarial tests, not production incident rates, but they show how unreliable model instructions can become under deliberate attack.

Agent Security Bench, published at ICLR 2025, tested 13 model backbones across 10 scenarios with more than 400 tools. Its highest average attack success rate was 84.3%. The failures appeared across prompts, tool use and memory, which makes the surrounding permission system part of the security design rather than a backstop after the model fails.

Knowing which agent is calling an API is only the first check. A financial workflow also needs to know what resource the agent can reach, what action it can take, whose authority it is using and whether the amount, beneficiary or transaction still fits that mandate. Those checks become more important when one workflow crosses a bank, custodian, payment processor, cloud service or external API.

See AI Agents Gain Identity and Wallet Access WCGW

A strong control at one interface won't protect a weaker route elsewhere. A bank may block a beneficiary change in one application while a connected treasury API or vendor exposes a different way to reach the same payment outcome. Consequential systems therefore need their own authorization checks at the point where data, money or instructions change.

Financial Agents Can Already Spend And Submit

Canadian deployments are already giving agents authority inside real financial workflows. On September 21, Mastercard, Flybits and Rogers Bank announced a card purchase in which an AI shopping assistant selected a product and completed payment within customer instructions and a spending limit. Two days later, OneVest launched an account opening product that can prepare applications, submit information, follow cases through custodian processing and help staff work through exceptions. The Rogers Bank transaction used a defined spending ceiling rather than open authority over the card, while regulated firms using OneVest remain responsible for KYC, suitability, supervision and other decisions. Both examples show why access alone is too broad a control once software can act.

Finance also leaves less room to correct a mistake after the fact. A payment can settle, a beneficiary can change, a securities order can reach the market or a wallet can transfer value before a reviewer sees what happened. Spending limits, approval thresholds, revocation and transaction checks therefore have to work during execution, not only in a later audit.

Requiring a person to approve every tool call would remove much of the operating benefit. The more practical model is graduated authority. Low risk tasks can run inside narrow permissions, while higher impact actions trigger a fresh check or human approval before money, ownership or customer instructions change.

Canada Is Defining Agent Identity And Permissions

Canadian guidance is becoming more specific. The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security's agentic AI guidance recommends a distinct identity for each agent, narrow permissions, temporary credentials, controls around tool use and human checkpoints for higher risk activity. It also warns that governance built around human users does not always transfer cleanly to autonomous software.

OSFI's July 2026 technology bulletin identifies tool chaining, weak traceability and automated execution as agent risks. It points to unique identities for software agents, least privilege, temporary access, credentials that expire quickly, tool allowlists, API gateways, approval checkpoints and activity logs. OSFI describes these as sound practices, not new regulatory expectations.

Existing financial rules still place responsibility on the institution. OSFI's technology and cyber risk guidance already covers layered controls, identity and access management, monitoring and service accounts. Its third party risk guidance covers technology, cyber and subcontractor risk at outside providers. Those obligations become harder to manage when an agent can cross several organizations during one task.

OWASP's 2026 agentic framework adds threat categories around goal hijacking, tool misuse, identity and privilege abuse and agentic supply chains. ISO/IEC 42001 provides an organization wide AI management system. These frameworks provide many of the pieces, but connected workflows still need each consequential system to enforce the authority attached to the task and transaction.

Talking Point

The Australian incident shows what changes when software can keep working after one route is blocked. In financial services, agent identity is only the start. Authority has to hold across the credential, tool, API, third party and final transaction, even when the agent finds another way to continue the task.

NCFA Canada logoThe 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

NCFA Financial Innovation MapNCFA Innovation Opportunity BriefsNCFA Fintech Insights
NCFA Fintech WhispererNCFA Fintech Fridays PodcastNCFA Weekly Newsletter

 

Read More
September 24, 2026   Enterprise, Scaleup, FinTech and Alternative Finance, Fundraising, Investing, Trading, Innovation and Resources, Leadership, Competition, Human Capital, Health, Legal Issues, Regulation, Consultation, Marketing, Strategy, Growth, Design, Online Funding / Investing Portals, Regtech, Compliance, Governance, Tech, Tools, Productivity, Venture Funding and Building   No comments

FAIR Challenges Wealthsimple Prediction Market Plan

September 24, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Regulation And Policy, Capital Markets And Market Infrastructure, Wealthtech Investing And Trading, Risk Compliance And Regtech

AI Image – Canadian prediction market regulation with gavel scales and financial charts

Canadian Prediction Market Access And Regulation

On September 24, 2026, FAIR Canada challenged Wealthsimple's prediction market proposal for a wider Canadian prediction market. Wealthsimple wants regulators to change how event contracts qualify for retail trading. FAIR wants the current limits to remain unless wider access can be shown to benefit investors and serve the public interest.

Wealthsimple published its proposal on August 4. On August 27, Canadian securities regulators kept sports and entertainment contracts outside securities and derivatives regulation. FAIR has now challenged the remaining case for adding more event contracts to the investment dealer channel.

Wealthsimple Wants New Rules For Prediction Market Contracts

Wealthsimple's August 4 white paper goes well beyond its Predict product. CIRO currently limits authorized dealers to contracts based on economic forecasts, environmental forecasts and financial indicators. Wealthsimple argues that these categories are subjective because similar contracts can fit more than one label or receive different treatment.

Its alternative focuses on who determines the result. Wealthsimple proposes approved settlement sources that include government agencies, established data providers, recognized institutions and selected news organizations. A Canadian unemployment contract could settle using Statistics Canada data, while a Bitcoin price contract could use an established financial benchmark.

The proposal could reach categories that Canadian investment dealers can't offer today. Wealthsimple includes accredited electoral authorities among potential settlement sources even though political event contracts are prohibited. It would still exclude contracts involving death, personal harm, terrorism, the initiation of armed conflict and events where one identifiable person can determine the outcome.

CSA And CIRO Keep Sports Prediction Markets Outside Securities Rules

Canada already opened a narrow regulated route earlier in 2026 when Wealthsimple entered Canada's regulated prediction market. Regulators drew another boundary on August 27 when the CSA and CIRO kept sports prediction markets outside securities rules. The CSA said sports and entertainment contracts shouldn't be regulated under securities and derivatives legislation, while CIRO said it would not approve dealer applications to offer them.

The Canadian market remains tightly controlled. CIRO has authorized two investment dealers to facilitate event contract trading, with offerings limited to economic forecasts, environmental forecasts and financial indicators. Contracts must have at least 30 days to maturity. Leverage is prohibited, along with elections, referendums, political nominations and other political events.

A dealer that wants to offer contracts outside those categories must file another material business change with CIRO. Other event contract categories remain under regulatory review.

FAIR Wants Evidence Before More Contracts Are Added

FAIR doesn't dispute that an event contract can meet the legal definition of a derivative. It disputes what should follow from that classification. Its September response asks regulators to consider investor benefit, capital market purpose, market integrity and the public interest before permitting additional categories for retail trading.

See:  Should Prediction Markets Be Allowed To Trade On Disasters?

That conflicts directly with Wealthsimple's settlement source approach. A reliable source can determine the result of a contract, but FAIR argues that it doesn't establish whether the contract belongs in the retail investment market. Reliable settlement and retail eligibility are separate questions in FAIR's analysis.

The two organizations also differ on the economic case. Wealthsimple says prediction markets can aggregate information, produce useful prices and help people hedge risk. FAIR says there isn't enough evidence that Canadian retail investors use the contracts already permitted for those purposes.

The 30 Day Rule Came From Offshore Binary Options

Wealthsimple also wants Canada to revisit its binary options rules. Multilateral Instrument 91-102 was introduced in 2017 after regulators faced widespread fraud involving offshore binary option platforms. Wealthsimple argues that regulated event contracts operate differently because trades pass through regulated dealers, futures intermediaries, exchanges and clearing organizations.

It also questions what the 30 day minimum achieves. A contract can satisfy the rule when it is listed and still trade shortly before expiry. Wealthsimple would rely more on dealer controls including recommended loss levels, deposit limits, cooling periods, trading breaks, self exclusion, education and market surveillance.

The rule still applies directly to prediction markets. Ontario regulators relied on MI 91-102 in a 2025 Polymarket settlement, finding that event contracts offered to Ontario residents included prohibited binary options with less than 30 days to maturity. FAIR argues that shorter contracts can also produce faster turnover and repeated exposure to gains and losses, so changing the rule requires evidence about the investor effects as well as differences in market structure.

Canada Has Participation Data But Little Investor Outcome Data

Wealthsimple says more than one million Canadians have already used prediction markets, mainly through offshore platforms. The figure is based on survey data rather than trading records. An Angus Reid Institute survey of 1,803 Canadian adults found that 4% had used a prediction market.

The same survey found limited interest among people who hadn't used one, while opposition to allowing prediction markets was higher than support. The results confirm that Canadians are participating, but they don't show how customers behave inside a regulated investment account. They also don't establish whether people use these contracts for hedging, forecasting or short term speculation.

The permitted Canadian market can now produce better evidence. Participation, repeat trading, average exposure, realized gains and losses, liquidity and spreads can all be measured. Regulators can also examine attempted manipulation and surveillance events, an issue NCFA has explored through prediction market insider trading and surveillance.

Another useful measure is whether Canadians leave offshore platforms once a regulated option is available here. Wealthsimple argues that some will and dealer data can show whether that happens and whether their trading behaviour changes.

Which Event Contracts Belong In Canada's Regulated Market?

Canada is really deciding three things. The August 27 decision on sports and entertainment shows that a contract can meet one legal test without automatically qualifying for retail trading through an investment dealer.

  • Is the contract legally a derivative?
  • Which regulator should oversee it?
  • Should an investment dealer be allowed to offer it to retail clients?

Wealthsimple wants less focus on the subject of the contract and more on how it works, how the result is settled and what controls the dealer has in place. FAIR wants stronger evidence that adding more contracts would benefit investors and support capital market activity. Canadian trading data can help answer that.

See Regulated Event Contract Infrastructure

The contracts already allowed in Canada can show who is trading, how often, how much they gain or lose and whether enough buyers and sellers show up. Regulators can also see whether a regulated Canadian option pulls users away from offshore platforms. That would give them Canadian evidence to work with instead of relying mainly on legal arguments and overseas trading volumes.

Talking Point

Canada already permits a narrow range of regulated prediction markets. Which additional event contracts should qualify, and what does actual Canadian trading behaviour say about expanding access?

NCFA Canada logoThe 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

NCFA Financial Innovation MapNCFA Innovation Opportunity BriefsNCFA Fintech Insights
NCFA Fintech WhispererNCFA Fintech Fridays PodcastNCFA Weekly Newsletter

 

Read More
September 23, 2026   Blockchain, Crypto, Digital Assets, Tokens, CBDCs, Stablecoins, Metaverse, NFTs, Enterprise, Scaleup, FinTech and Alternative Finance, Fundraising, Investing, Trading, Innovation and Resources, Leadership, Competition, Human Capital, Health, Marketing, Strategy, Growth, Design, Payments, Transfers, Rewards, Regtech, Compliance, Governance, Tech, Tools, Productivity, Venture Funding and Building   No comments

Canada’s Big Six Collaborate on CAD Tokenized Deposits

September 23, 2026 | NCFA Market Activity | Payments Infrastructure And Money Movement, Digital Assets Blockchain And Tokenization, Banking And Credit, Competition And Market Structure

AI Image – Illustration of Canadian banks collaborating on CAD tokenized deposits and shared digital payment infrastructure

Big Six Partnership For Tokenized Canadian Dollars

On September 22, 2026, BMO, CIBC, National Bank of Canada, RBC, Scotiabank and TD announced that they are jointly exploring CAD tokenized deposits. The first phase aims to transfer tokenized deposits across Canadian financial institutions. Longer term, the banks want to connect the project with other emerging digital asset infrastructure.

It's a partnership at an early stage, but banks have been here before. The banks haven't disclosed a project name, investment amount, technology provider, structure or governance model.  They also haven't explained whether each bank would issue its own tokenized liability or exactly what happens when a deposit transfers from one institution to another.

Canada's largest banks compete hard for deposits, payments and corporate clients. They also have a long history of building together when six versions of the same underlying system would cost more and work less effectively.

Four Dates Put The Partnership In Context

March 5, 2026 The Bank of Canada completed Project Samara with Export Development Canada, RBC and TD. EDC issued a C$100 million tokenized bond to a closed investor group and settled the payments in wholesale central bank money. The experiment achieved real time settlement and improved data integrity, but system complexity, liquidity costs and new governance requirements offset some of the efficiency gains.

May 27, 2026 The Bank of Canada joined BIS Project Agorá. Its prototype combines tokenized commercial bank deposits with wholesale central bank money on a programmable platform for wholesale cross border payments.

September 10, 2026 OSFI clarified how Canadian bank regulation treats tokenized deposits. OSFI said the technology used to represent a product doesn't determine its legal nature and that tokenized deposits are not legally distinct from traditional deposits simply because they are represented digitally.

September 22, 2026 All six major Canadian banks announced that they were exploring a Canadian dollar tokenized deposit solution together. That brought the Canadian story from capital markets testing and international experimentation into a domestic partnership between the banks that hold much of the country's commercial deposits.

These projects weren't announced as one coordinated program. Seen together, they show the regulatory, settlement and commercial pieces of tokenized Canadian dollar finance being worked on at roughly the same time.

OSFI's position gives the partnership a clearer legal starting point. Tokenization doesn't automatically turn a bank deposit into a different financial product. Existing legal, technology, cyber and third party risk requirements still apply, and banks are expected to engage their supervisors before launching novel products.

Deposit insurance will depend on the final design, however the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation says innovative products, including tokenized deposits, may qualify for protection when they meet the legal requirements for an eligible deposit. CDIC assesses them case by case, so the Big Six project can't yet be described as insured.

It is also different from Canada's developing stablecoin market. Canada's federal stablecoin framework applies its new issuer regime to non-financial institutions. Banks and credit unions already operate under prudential regulation.

A qualifying tokenized deposit can preserve a customer's deposit claim on a bank while adding new ways to transfer or settle value digitally. Canada's stablecoin framework, by comparison, requires non-financial issuers to back fiat stablecoins with reserves and provide redemption at par.

See Canada Stablecoin Regulations Guide

It becomes important if tokenized securities, stablecoins and bank deposits eventually need to exchange value on the same financial networks. Canada's banks aren't simply exploring another digital asset. They are exploring what regulated commercial bank money could look like inside those networks.

Canada's Banks Have Shared The Plumbing Before

The idea of competitors cooperating behind the customer layer isn't new in Canadian banking. Payments, identity, cheque processing and compliance have all produced examples where financial institutions shared systems or standards, then kept competing on the services built around them.

Collaboration What The Banks Shared What Happened
Interac Canada's major financial institutions came together in 1984 to create a national shared cash dispensing network. That network expanded into debit and electronic transfers. In 2025, Interac processed 7 billion debit transactions and 1.6 billion e-Transfers.
SecureKey BMO, CIBC, RBC, Scotiabank, TD and Desjardins backed common digital identity infrastructure. The institutions invested C$27 million in SecureKey in 2016. Its Canadian verification capabilities later became part of Interac. Interac Verified handled 544 million transactions in 2025.
Symcor BMO, RBC and TD combined cheque processing that had previously been handled separately. The collaboration consolidated 21 processing sites to seven and put the banks on one technology platform.
CanDeal Third Party Risk All six major banks are working with CanDeal on common third party due diligence and compliance processes. The banks and CanDeal announced their investment in February 2026. The amount wasn't disclosed and the project is still publicly described as a pilot, so there isn't a verified outcome yet.

Interac began in 1984 because customers needed access to cash beyond their own bank's machines. Four decades later, the same network supports everyday payments and money transfers at national scale. The banks didn't need six incompatible cash networks to compete for customers.

The identity example required actual shared capital. BMO, CIBC, RBC, Scotiabank, TD and Desjardins put C$27 million into SecureKey in 2016 to commercialize a common digital identity network. Interac later acquired the Canadian rights to SecureKey's digital ID services, including Verified.Me. Interac Vrified processed 544 million transactions in 2025.

Symcor example highlights the cost argument more directly. When BMO, RBC and TD combined cheque processing in 1996, the operation cut 21 processing sites to seven while moving the banks onto one technology platform. Customers still chose among competing banks. The repetitive work behind cheque processing no longer had to be reproduced three times.

The Big Six returned to that model this year. In February, they invested with CanDeal in a common third party risk solution intended to reduce repeated supplier checks and standardize due diligence. CanDeal hasn't disclosed how much the banks invested or published enough results to judge the pilot yet.

Banks can share the plumbing where duplication adds cost, then compete on products, pricing, service and customers.

Tokenized deposits make the shared infrastructure question more practical. One bank can digitize its own deposits, but interbank use requires agreement on how the claim is preserved, how compliance controls apply and how settlement is completed. That is where common rules become necessary.

Interac's history also shows how access can impact a shared network. The Competition Bureau previously challenged Interac's restrictions that limited competitors' access to the network. The resulting agreement widened participation and required access to the technical information needed to connect. Later changes gave Interac an independent board and a for profit structure while keeping access open and non-discriminatory.

That history makes the new partnership's promise to include other deposit taking institutions worth watching. Access rules haven't been published yet. The eventual treatment of smaller banks, credit unions and other eligible institutions could determine whether the project becomes widely useful Canadian infrastructure or mainly a shared capability for its six founding banks.

See How Canada Started Opening Its Financial Infrastructure

That question is more relevant now than it would have been a few years ago. Payments Canada has widened membership, regulated payment service providers have entered federal supervision, consumer driven banking is being implemented and Canada has enacted a stablecoin framework. A new tokenized deposit system would be entering a financial market where more firms are gaining roles in payments, data and digital money.

How Other Markets Are Testing Tokenized Bank Money

Banks and payment networks elsewhere are already testing different ways to keep commercial bank money useful as financial activity becomes more programmable.

Initiative Current Scale Or Stage What It Adds To The Comparison
Kinexys by J.P. Morgan More than US$4 trillion processed since inception and about US$7 billion daily. A single global bank has already taken blockchain based payments, settlement and tokenization into production at substantial volume.
Citi Token Services Live 24 hours a day across participating Citi markets. Citi uses tokenized bank money for near real time cross border payments and liquidity transfers inside its own network.
Great British Tokenised Deposits Seven banks and building societies participating in a live industry pilot. The UK is testing shared tokenized deposits against marketplace payments, remortgaging and digital asset settlement rather than leaving the use cases theoretical.
The Clearing House Owned by 25 large U.S. financial institutions and developing interbank clearing and settlement for tokenized commercial bank money. The model connects tokenized deposits with existing RTP and CHIPS payment infrastructure and says banks of all sizes will be able to participate.
BankChain Alliance Thirty nine U.S. state banking associations are developing bank owned blockchain infrastructure targeted for 2027. The proposed ownership model is designed to give community and regional banks a role in common digital money infrastructure.

The UK project is interesting because it's testing specific jobs that tokenized deposits could do. Those include marketplace payments, remortgaging and digital asset settlement. UK Finance and EY identified more than 40 potential business benefits and estimated that tokenized deposits could generate more than £3 billion in economic benefit.

The U.S. examples take different approaches. J.P. Morgan and Citi have built their own bank networks for institutional clients. The Clearing House is taking a shared industry approach so tokenized commercial bank money can clear between institutions and connect with payment systems that already exist.

Canada hasn't yet said which structure it plans to use. The Big Six partnership could become a common platform, a set of interoperable bank issued tokens or something else. Canada's earlier bank partnerships show that sharing core infrastructure can reduce duplication. The international examples also show that the real test will be whether the system supports useful transactions at scale.

The Big Six partnership will be judged by whether it can support useful transactions at lower cost and with less duplication than existing systems.

Talking Point

Canada's largest banks have successfully shared payment, identity, processing and risk infrastructure before. Can they do the same with tokenized deposits while giving enough institutions access for the partnership to become useful national infrastructure?

NCFA Canada logoThe 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

NCFA Financial Innovation MapNCFA Innovation Opportunity BriefsNCFA Fintech Insights
NCFA Fintech WhispererNCFA Fintech Fridays PodcastNCFA Weekly Newsletter

 

Read More
« Older posts
Newer posts »