The Unit of Normative Projection and Studies of Financial Regulation - URF of the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit, submitted comments and published on its website until September 14, 2018 the document called "Study on Low-Value Payment Systems and its Regulation". In this document, the URF proposes the renewal of the regulation that governs low-value payment systems - known by their acronym SPVB, to adjust them to new international standards concordant with a new digital economy that brought e-commerce and financial services to the forefront. interveners that are part of this.

... payment gateways ... intermediary companies between the establishment of commerce and the payer that fulfill the function of delivering response of the validation of the operation.

Precisely one of the participants in the structure of the digital payment system and that is taking a major role for its influence and for the benefits of its work to the market, are the so-called payment gateways, defined in the document cited above as suppliers of payment services and by the Bank of the Republic, in a slightly more precise definition, as intermediary companies between the establishment of commerce and the payer that fulfill the function of delivering response of the validation of the operation.

The payment gateways as actors of the payment chain work under two models: the gateway model in which the associated trade uses the platform to facilitate the payment and by operation of the SPBV, the money product of the transaction is received directly from the bank payer in the bank account of the commerce; and the aggregator model, in which the payer's money is paid directly to the accounts of the payment gateway and from there, by a process of dispersion in charge of the gateway, is paid to the account of the subscribed businesses.

Those who are not very familiar with electronic commerce often ask the reason and the difference in the choice of one or the other model for the creation of their e-commerce.

It must be taken into account that the gateway model is useful when the company has transactional rates previously negotiated with the banks and the services of the gateway are required as a technological solution to facilitate the use of the means of payment by the clients.

In the aggregator model, on the other hand, the agreements and fees per transaction are negotiated directly by the platform, and any trade registered in the gateway can benefit from those fees.

After understanding the role of each model, it is not difficult to gauge the importance that in a growing digital economy, with e-commerce figures also growing, represents an aggregator model for small and medium enterprises, it is a double benefit: first , because of the comfortable acquisition fees and second, because they facilitate digitization and online presence.

The URF considered it necessary that the gateways that operate under getway models were supervised indirectly through supervised entities that administer the payment system

The URF considered necessary that the gateways operating under getway models were supervised indirectly through supervised entities that administer the payment system, a decision that became reality with the guidelines enshrined in Circular 008 of 2018, and that the gateways that operate under aggregator models were monitored by the acquiring entities.

Supervision will focus on verifying that the gateways have personal data protection management systems, control procedures for the prevention of money laundering and financing of terrorism and in the management of operational risk and risk of managing public resources.

With regard to these last two risks, the following regulatory proposals are included: the requirement to set up an insurance policy to protect the resources that are subject to dispersion; or the constitution of an autonomous patrimony for the administration of the resources; and term of transfer of resources from the catwalk to the stores without exceeding thirty days.

... in the case of the undertakings, the decision to impose requirements for the constitution of autonomous patrimonies does not seem appropriate

In order with these regulatory proposals we can say that we think the use of the insurance policy is very appropriate, and not only appropriate but adapted to the needs of small and medium-sized companies that, as they report growth, will be able to expand in a proportional manner. the coverage of the policy. On the other hand, in the case of the ventures, the decision to impose requirements for the constitution of autonomous assets due to their high operating costs in relation to the type of transactions handled by the SPBV does not seem appropriate.

Finally, in regard to the transfer of resources without exceeding thirty days, the rules of the commercial code for the contract of mandate that, among others, use most of these gateways for the execution, management of payments and transactions with registered businesses, since this type of regulation, from our point of view, would be sufficient to reinforce the use of the policy.

__________________

* Lawyer specialized in Computer Law and New Technologies. With experience in consultancy in the area of information and communication technologies - ICT, entrepreneurship, public and private procurement in ICT, personal data protection, web business models and applications.