Community

It depends on whether it is a credit card or a debit card.

For a debit card, the payment hub will contact the core banking system for each stage - first a funds authorisation request and then the funds clearing request (which some banks call deal completion).

Typically, the core banking system does not manage revolving credit accounts, so the core system will not be involved in authorising and clearing credit card transactions.

Good points Andrew. On replacing physical cash with digital cash, clearly it doesn't solve financial inclusion but it can make it worse if you require KYC, AML and a bank account.

This is about widely available digital cash, it is not about wholesale and it is not about bank accounts. m-pesa in Africa, predominantly Kenya, is account based mobile money. The digital cash will only replace physical cash if it is anonymous and if it can be used offline with immediate finality. So forget blockchain based payments fo any large country, clearing cannot be on a blockchain, though minting and settlement could be. As this has to include the unbanked, forget KYC and AML. This means there will have to be caps on the size of payment and balances in wallets.  

It is not just volatility, it is also throughput. Bitcoin is set up for settlement but not for clearing. It seems that Satoshi Nakamoto got them confused...

I regard blockchain as being a denial of service attack on the innovation dollars of banks.

There are two different technologies - distributed ledger and smart contracts. There are significant issues with both.

DLT is a kind of database. It is insert only, immutable (hence cannot contain any PII because of GDPR), and is distributed but not partition tolerant (because it must always be available and strongly consistent). That means it is suited to settlement but not clearing. Its only enterprise use case is therefore management of ownership of assets. But this requires trusted parties for the consensus to be deterministic. So the hype around Bitcoin, which uses probabalistic consensus, is not transferable to reliable enterprise use cases. In any case, Bitcoin is really Bitgold - it is a store of value but far too slow to be used for transfer of value.

Smart contracts require the enteprise to master immutable code in distributed multi-threaded applications. These are fiendishly difficult to get right. It is much harder than writing provably correct code for safety critical applications, like fly-by-wire airliners (think 737 Max 8). This is because the code has to be proved correct while multiple distributed services execute the code which is not the case for fly-by-wire. The software industry is not ready for this problem

RIX is an RTGS, that is, a settlement system. A clearing and settlement mechanism (CSM) needs both clearing and settlement to work. Automated Clearing Houses (ACH) provide this part of the CSM. You can read all about RIX at https://www.bis.org/cpmi/paysys/swedencomp.pdf - BIS has descriptions of all the major CSMs in the world. RIX can settle Krona or Euro (K-RIX and E-RIX). There are two ACHs, Postgirot (internal to the Post Bank) and Bankgirot which is owned by the banks and does bilateral net settlement using RIX.

K-RIX is not real time for low value payments. Payments under about $50k are aggregated and net settled. E-RIX payments are sent to TARGET so presumably clear on a D+1 basis, not real time.

Adopting TIPS enables E-RIX to do single immediate payments for low value retail transactions in euros. It is not clear to me how TIPS could be used for K-RIX but maybe that is not the plan.