Licensing, Authorisation & Market Access

Africa has no single bloc-wide licensing regime; authorisation is per-country and central-bank-led. South Africa is transitioning from a bank-sponsored NPS Act 1998 model to an activity-based authorisation framework (SARB draft Directive / Exemption Notice)… Full module →

Algeria has moved from an unregulated monétique environment to a formal PSP licensing regime under the Bank of Algeria (Règlement 25-02 and Instruction 06-2025), a parallel digital-bank authorisation track (Règlement 24-04), and continued dominance of… Full module →

Argentina has no single EMI/PI licence; the BCRA operates a functional PSP registration regime under the Financial Entities Law framework, with multiple registrable roles. The flagship category is the PSPCP (payment service provider offering payment… Full module →

APAC has no single licensing regime; it is fragmented per-country with an activity-based trend. Singapore runs a tiered PS Act licence (SPI/MPI/money-changing); Hong Kong licenses SVF issuers under the PSSVFO; India authorises non-bank Payment Aggregators… Full module →

The RBA has concluded its Review of Merchant Card Payment Costs and Surcharging, mandating removal of card surcharging and lower interchange caps from 1 October 2026, with a further consultation on BNPL/mobile wallets/three-party networks/e-commerce to follow… Full module →

Austria runs a function-based licensing regime under the Payment Services Act 2018 (ZaDiG 2018, transposing PSD2), the Banking Act (BWG) and the Electronic Money Act 2010 (E-GeldG). The FMA is sole licensing/supervisory authority for payment institutions… Full module →

Bangladesh's payment licensing regime is undergoing a foundational shift: the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2024 (passed 4 July 2024) now provides the statutory basis for licensing, replacing reliance on the older Bangladesh Payment and Settlement… Full module →

Belgium runs the standard EEA PSD2/EMD2 licensing model: the National Bank of Belgium (NBB) authorises and registers payment institutions (PI) and electronic money institutions (EMI), with a lighter 'limited'/waiver regime for smaller-volume providers… Full module →

Brazil regulates non-bank payment provision under Law 12.865/2012, which created the 'payment institution' (instituição de pagamento) category within the Brazilian Payment System (SPB). BCB Resolution No. 80/2021 (amended by Rule 494/2025 and Joint Rule… Full module →

Bulgaria operates the standard EU/EEA non-bank PSP licensing model: the Law on Payment Services and Payment Systems (PSPSA, 2018) transposes PSD2 and governs both payment institution (PI) and electronic money institution (EMI) authorisation, with the… Full module →

The National Bank of Cambodia (NBC) holds exclusive statutory authority to license and supervise all banks, financial institutions and payment service providers under the 1999 Law on Banking and Financial Institutions (as amended by the Law on Commercial… Full module →

Cameroon's payments licensing regime is set at the CEMAC regional level via Regulation No 04/18/CEMAC/UMAC/COBAC (in force since 1 Jan 2019), supervised nationally by the Ministry of Finance with COBAC approval. Three authorised-provider categories exist… Full module →

Canada has a dual federal/non-bank track. Non-bank PSPs are not licensed but must register with the Bank of Canada under the Retail Payment Activities Act (RPAA); a separate FINTRAC registration applies to money services businesses (MSBs) under the PCMLTFA… Full module →

Alberta payment/MSB firms sit under a dual federal licensing stack: FINTRAC registration (AML/CTF gatekeeping) plus, since September 2025, Bank of Canada RPAA registration for non-bank PSPs. Alberta layers on the Financial Innovation Act sandbox and ASC… Full module →

CA-BC payment providers sit under a dual federal/provincial licensing stack: federal FINTRAC MSB/FMSB registration under the PCMLTFA, federal Bank of Canada PSP registration under the RPAA (fully in force since Sept 8, 2025), and a BC-specific provincial MSB… Full module →

Payment service providers touching New Brunswick operate under a dual federal/provincial structure: federally, the Retail Payment Activities Act (RPAA) requires PSP registration with the Bank of Canada and FINTRAC MSB registration under the PCMLTFA applies in… Full module →

Ontario payment/money-services entities operate under Canada's federal dual-registration model: FINTRAC registration as a Money Services Business (MSB) or Foreign MSB under the PCMLTFA, plus (where retail payment functions are performed) Bank of Canada… Full module →

Quebec payments licensing operates on two co-existing tracks: the federal Retail Payment Activities Act (RPAA) registration regime for PSPs administered by the Bank of Canada, and the province's own Money-Services Businesses Act (MSBA) licensing regime … Full module →

Dual-track non-bank regime: Ley 20.950 stored-value + Fintech Law 21.521 Title II provider registration; no unitary EMI licence; NCG 502 central provider rule, NCG 559 adds prior-notice duty (30 Apr 2026 deadline).

China's non-bank payment sector is governed by State Council Order No.768 (in force since 1 May 2024) and PBOC Implementation Rules (Order [2024] No.4), moving from a three-category to two-category licensing system; licence numbers are contracting sharply… Full module →

Colombia has no single EMI regime; it runs a dual-supervisor model. The SFC (Superintendencia Financiera de Colombia) is the frontline licensing authority for financial, insurance and securities institutions, while Banco de la República is the monetary/FX… Full module →

Costa Rica has no dedicated EMI/PSP/MTL licensing statute. Banks and non-bank PSPs alike fall under the general supervisory perimeter of SUGEF/CONASSIF (Law 7558, Law 7732), with non-bank financial intermediation captured via Article 15 bis of Law 7558 since… Full module →

Croatia operates the standard EEA licensing tiers under the Payment System Act and Electronic Money Act: credit institutions, payment institutions, small payment institutions, electronic money institutions, small electronic money institutions, and registered… Full module →

Curacao's payments licensing regime is anchored in the Centrale Bank van Curacao en Sint Maarten (CBCS) as sole prudential/AML regulator. Banks are licensed under the 1994 National Ordinance on Supervision of Banking and Credit Institutions; money transfer… Full module →

EU-harmonised dual PI/EMI authorisation regime under CBC: PIs Law 31(I)/2018 (PSD2), EMIs Laws 81(I)/2012&2018 (EMD2). EMI initial capital EUR 350k; PI tiered EUR 20k/50k/125k; no small-institution regime. CASP/MiCA sits with CySEC.

Czech Republic operates a fully PSD2/EMD2-transposed licensing regime under Act No. 370/2017 Coll. on Payment System, with the Czech National Bank (CNB) as sole licensing and supervisory authority for banks, payment institutions (PI), electronic money… Full module →

Denmark regulates payment services under the Payments Act (Lov om betalinger, implementing PSD2/EMD2), administered exclusively by Finanstilsynet (Danish FSA). Providers must hold authorisation as a payment institution or e-money institution (or operate via… Full module →

DR payments licensing sits under Ley Monetaria y Financiera No. 183-02, administered by the Junta Monetaria, BCRD and SIB; EPEs, payment/settlement system administrators and payment aggregators are authorised and capitalised under SIPARD (overhauled 2025); no… Full module →

Ecuador's fintech/payments licensing regime rests on the 2022 Ley Fintech and its 2023-2025 secondary regulations, creating a multi-regulator authorisation model (BCE, Superintendencia de Bancos, SCVS, SEPS) with a dedicated non-bank e-money/payments licence… Full module →

Egypt operates a central-bank-led, non-EMI/PI-style licensing regime. The Central Bank and Banking System Law No. 194 of 2020 (Chapter 4) brought PSOs and PSPs under direct CBE licensing for the first time; before this CBE supervised payments indirectly via… Full module →

Estonia operates the standard EEA PSD2/EMD2 licensing model: Finantsinspektsioon authorises and supervises payment institutions and e-money institutions under PIEIA/MERAS, with dual bank/non-bank routes and EEA passporting.

EEA harmonised non-bank PSP licensing under PSD2/EMD2 (PI and EMI routes) plus bank-PSP route, home-state NCA single licence passportable EEA-wide. PSD3/PSR reached provisional political agreement 27 Nov 2025 to merge PI and EMI regimes into a unified… Full module →

Finland runs the standard EEA PSD2/EMD2-transposed licensing regime; FIN-FSA authorises and supervises PIs, EMIs and credit institutions, plus CASPs under MiCA; PSD3/PSR is in final legislative approval (not yet transposed).

France operates the harmonised EU payments licensing stack via the ACPR; non-bank PI/EMI routes plus bank-PSP alternative; simplified regimes <EUR 5m (EMI) / <EUR 3m (PI) monthly; three-month statutory clock; EU passporting from a French licence.

BaFin authorises PIs (ZAG §10) and EMIs (ZAG §11); AISPs register under §34; bank-PSP vs non-bank PI/EMI core split; EWR passporting available.

Ghana payments licensing anchored by Act 987 (BoG-administered): tiered non-bank PSP regime (Standard/Medium/Enhanced), DEMI for non-bank e-money, bank/SDI route under Act 930; minimum capital/permissible activities/fees set by Notice BG/GOV/SEC/2019/16.

Gibraltar runs a GFSC-supervised non-bank PI/EMI regime distinct from the UK's, anchored in the Financial Services Act 2019 and the Financial Services (Electronic Money) Regulations 2020 plus the Payment Services Regulations. EMIs (authorised and registered)… Full module →

Greece runs the standard EEA licensing perimeter: credit institutions (bank-PSP route) need no separate PSD2/EMD2 licence, while non-banks require BoG authorisation as a Payment Institution or Electronic Money Institution under Law 4537/2018 (PSD2) and Law… Full module →

Hong Kong's non-bank payments perimeter is built around the Stored Value Facility (SVF) licence administered by the HKMA under the Payment Systems and Stored Value Facilities Ordinance (Cap. 584). There is no separate EMI/PI regime as in the EU/UK… Full module →

Hungary operates the standard EEA bank-PSP / non-bank EMI-PI licensing route under MNB supervision, transposing PSD2 and EMD2 into national law via a stack of domestic Acts and MNB decrees; EMI licensing remains a narrow, tightly-supervised route (only three… Full module →

Iceland regulates payment services under Act No. 114/2021 on Payment Services (PSD2 transposition) and the Act on Financial Undertakings No. 161/2002, both administered by the Central Bank of Iceland (CBI), which absorbed the former standalone Financial… Full module →

India operates a dual bank/non-bank regime under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 (PSS Act), with the RBI as sole authorising authority. There is no single EMI licence; instead discrete authorisations exist for Payment Aggregators (PA), Prepaid… Full module →

PS Act 2019 modular activity-based licensing over seven activities, three tiers (Money-Changing/SPI/MPI), banks exempt; commenced 28 Jan 2020, expanded scope from 4 Apr 2024; DPT application gatekeeping tightened 26 Aug 2024.

Ireland operates the EU PSD2/EMD2 authorisation framework. Payment Institutions (PIs) are authorised under the European Union (Payment Services) Regulations 2018 (S.I. 6/2018, transposing PSD2); Electronic Money Institutions (EMIs) under the European… Full module →

Isle of Man payment services, money transmission and e-money issuance are licensed by the Isle of Man Financial Services Authority (IOMFSA) as Class 8 'Money Transmission Services' under the Financial Services Act 2008 (FSA08) and the Regulated Activities… Full module →

Italy runs a dual bank-PSP / non-bank licensing regime under the Testo Unico Bancario (TUB, D.Lgs. 385/1993) and the PSD2-transposing D.Lgs. 11/2010, supervised by Banca d'Italia. Payment institutions (IP) and e-money institutions (IMEL) are authorised and… Full module →

CI payments licensing is set regionally by BCEAO/WAMU. Two non-bank routes: PI authorisation (Instruction n°001-01-2024, in force 23 Jan 2024) and EMI agrément (Instruction n°008-05-2015). The 2024 reform ended the bank-backing model. Compliance/connection… Full module →

Japan's core non-bank payments/crypto statute is the Payment Services Act (PSA, Act No. 59 of 2009). A major 2025 amendment package took operational effect 2026-06-13. The FIEA/PSA amendment reclassifying crypto assets as financial instruments received final… Full module →

Kazakhstan's payments market access runs on a dual track: the national regime under the Law on Payments and Payment Systems (registration/licensing via the National Bank of Kazakhstan, NBK) and the parallel AIFC/AFSA regime for fintech and digital-asset… Full module →

CBK single-tier non-bank PSP authorisation regime under NPS Act 2011 / NPS Regulations 2014; four PSP categories with First Schedule capital floors (KES 5m / 50m / 20m / 1m); no EMI/PI passporting; foreign licences not recognised; local incorporation… Full module →

Payments licensing in Laos runs through the Bank of the Lao PDR (BOL) under the amended Law on Payment System, with BOL Decision 511/BOL (June 2025) as the current governing instrument for domestic and cross-border payment service provider licensing… Full module →

LATAM has no single bloc-wide payments licence; each member state runs its own non-bank PI/e-money regime. BR licenses PIs under Law 12.865/2013 + BCB Rule #80 (amended by #494/#495 2025); MX authorises IFPEs under the 2018 Fintech Law via CNBV.

Latvia operates a full EEA-passportable licensing regime for PI/EMI under national law (PSD2/EMD2 transposition); Latvijas Banka is sole licensor/supervisor since the 2023 FCMC merger; a new specialised credit institution licence (6 Jan 2026, EUR1M capital)… Full module →

Liechtenstein's payments licensing regime rests on the Payment Services Act (ZDG, PSD2 transposition) and the E-Money Act (EGG), both supervised by the FMA's Banking Supervision Section, with a small licensed population (three EMIs, one PI, alongside 11… Full module →

LT non-bank EMI/PI regime under EMD2/PSD2 transposition; unrestricted EMI EUR 350,000 capital + EEA passporting; restricted EMI no capital, LT-only; PI capital EUR 20k-125k by service mix; BoL single supervisor.

CSSF authorises PIs, EMIs and registers AISPs under the amended Law of 10 November 2009 (PSL); no PI/EMI activity without CSSF authorisation; capital floors EUR 20,000-125,000 (PI) and EUR 350,000 (EMI); EEA passporting on notification; PSD3/PSR… Full module →

Macau SAR's payments/financial licensing regime runs under the Financial System Act (Decree-Law 32/93/M, substantially revised with effect from 1 November 2023), administered by the Monetary Authority of Macao (AMCM) which advises the Chief Executive, who… Full module →

Malaysia is a single-regulator, non-EMI-regime jurisdiction. Payment activity is authorised by Bank Negara Malaysia under the Financial Services Act 2013 (FSA) and the parallel Islamic Financial Services Act 2013 (IFSA), which repealed and consolidated the… Full module →

Malta consolidates payments licensing under the Financial Institutions Act (Cap. 376), MFSA single regulator; PI (PSD2) and EMI (EMD2) routes plus bank-PSP via Banking Act (Cap. 371); EMI capital >=EUR 350k, EU passporting via notification; among the EU's… Full module →

Mexico operates a dedicated 2018 Fintech Law (Ley para Regular las Instituciones de Tecnología Financiera) establishing two ITF licence types: Electronic Payment Funds Institutions (IFPE, e-money/wallet) and Crowdfunding Institutions (IFC). Licences are… Full module →

Morocco operates a non-EMI/non-PSD bespoke regime under Banking Law 103-12 (promulgated by Dahir 1-14-193, 24 Dec 2014), supervised by central bank Bank Al-Maghrib (BAM). The law created a non-bank 'établissement de paiement' (payment institution) category… Full module →

Mozambique runs a bank-centric, single-regulator licensing model under Banco de Moçambique (BdM). Credit institutions, financial companies, microfinance operators and electronic money institutions (IME/EMIs) are all licensed and supervised by BdM under Law… Full module →

Myanmar's payments licensing regime rests on the Financial Institutions Law (2016) for banks/NBFIs and the CBM's 2016 Mobile Financial Services Regulation for non-bank e-money/mobile-wallet issuers, both administered by the Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM)… Full module →

Nepal's payments licensing regime is anchored in the Payment and Settlement Act 2075 (2019), operationalised via the Payment and Settlement Bylaw 2077 (2020) and the Licensing Policy for Institutions that Perform Payment-Related Work 2079 (2023). NRB licenses… Full module →

NL PSD2/EMD2 licensing under the Wft on a twin-peaks model: DNB prudential authoriser, AFM conduct. PI capital EUR 20k/50k/125k; EMI EUR 350k. PSD3/PSR migration to a unified PI-authorised-to-issue-e-money regime is pending and NOT yet finalised — earliest… Full module →

New Zealand has NO bespoke EMI/PI licence. Payment service providers are not subject to a specific payments licence; instead they register on the Financial Service Providers Register (FSPR) under the FSP (Registration and Dispute Resolution) Act 2008 and pick… Full module →

Nigeria operates a CBN-led, multi-tier, activity-based PSP licensing regime set by the December 2020 Licence Categorisation circular and the May 2021 capital requirements, anchored in BOFIA 2020 which classifies PSPs as Other Financial Institutions. Four… Full module →

Norway regulates payment services and e-money through the EEA-transposed PSD2/EMD2 framework, embedded in the Financial Institutions Act and Financial Contracts Act, with Finanstilsynet as sole licensing and supervisory authority for banks, payment… Full module →

Pakistan's payments licensing regime rests on the PS&EFT Act 2007 (SBP), non-bank EMI licensing (2019 Regulations, revised 2023, 3-stage process), and a parallel Digital Bank framework (Jan 2022, 5 licences issued); EMI cohort has seen significant churn since… Full module →

Panama has no dedicated EMI/PSP licensing statute in force. The Superintendencia de Bancos de Panamá (SBP) supervises banks and, under general Banking Law powers, non-bank payment entities primarily for AML/CFT purposes; a dedicated fintech licensing… Full module →

Peru's e-money regime rests on Ley 29985 (2013), reserving e-money issuance to SBS-supervised EEDEs and multi-operation banks. From 1 April 2026 BCRP Circular 0022-2025-BCRP overlays a broader PSP taxonomy including a new non-SBS-supervised 'Entidad de… Full module →

The Philippines payments regime is anchored by the National Payment Systems Act (RA 11127, 2018), under which the BSP exercises exclusive oversight of payment systems. Non-bank payment players register as Operators of Payment Systems (OPS) under BSP Circular… Full module →

Poland transposes PSD2/EMD via the Act on Payment Services (UUP), supervised solely by KNF. Non-bank routes: full KIP/API (EUR20k/50k/125k by service, PIS/AIS + EEA passport), domestic EMI (EUR350k), and MIP/SPI (domestic-only, EUR1.5m/month + EUR2k/client… Full module →

Portugal runs the standard EEA PSD2/EMD2 licensing architecture: Banco de Portugal (BdP) authorises payment institutions (PI) and electronic money institutions (EMI) under the RJSPME (Decree-Law 91/2018), alongside the separate, ECB/BdP-authorised… Full module →

QCB single-regulator onshore PSP licensing under Payment Services Regulations (eff. 15 Sept 2021, QCB Law No. 13 of 2012); banks exempt from separate PSP licence; tiered capital QAR 2m-10m; offshore QFC regime parallel; ~10 fintech PSP licences as of 2024.

Romania applies the EU dual-regime split: payment institutions (PIs) and electronic money institutions (EMIs) are authorised and supervised by the National Bank of Romania (BNR/NBR) under Law 209/2019 (PSD2) and Law 210/2019 (EMD2), separate from the… Full module →

Russia's payment market is governed by the Federal Law 'On the National Payment System' (161-FZ), which defines money transfer operators, e-money operators, payment system operators and payment infrastructure service operators. The Bank of Russia licenses… Full module →

Unified BNR-led PSP licensing under Reg 74/2023 / Law 061/2021; Categories I-IV, RWF 30m-300m initial capital; Rwandan incorporation + resident CEO required; bank and non-bank routes; recategorisation deadline 18 Sept 2024 (outcome unverified).

Saudi Arabia operates a unitary SAMA-supervised payments licensing regime under the Law of Payments and Payment Services (Royal Decree M/26, 22/03/1443H) and its Implementing Regulation (effective 13/06/2023G), which repealed and replaced the January 2020… Full module →

Senegal's payments licensing regime is set regionally by the BCEAO. Instruction n°001-01-2024 recast the licensing map into PI/EMI tracks and ended the bank-backed operating model; enforcement cutover from 1 Sept 2025. Uptake lags: 11 licences vs ~131 active… Full module →

Serbia operates a bank-PSP vs non-bank PI/EMI licensing model under the Law on Payment Services (Official Gazette RS 139/2014, as amended, most recently by the Law Amending the Law on Payment Services adopted 31 July 2024, applicable since 6 May 2025). The… Full module →

Singapore licenses payment service providers under the Payment Services Act 2019 (PS Act), administered by MAS, which commenced 28 January 2020 and was amended 4 April 2024. Three licence classes exist — Major Payment Institution (MPI), Standard Payment… Full module →

Slovakia runs the standard EEA PSD2/EMD2 dual-track regime supervised by NBS (Act No 492/2009 Coll.). PSD3/PSR trilogue texts were endorsed by COREPER on 22 April 2026, with Official Journal publication expected Q2/Q3 2026 and application (merging EMI into a… Full module →

Slovenia implements PSD2/EMD2 via the single Payment Services, Services for Issuing Electronic Money and Payment Systems Act (ZPlaSSIED, in force since 22 February 2018), with Banka Slovenije as sole authorising and supervisory authority for payment… Full module →

South Africa's NPS is governed primarily by the National Payment System Act 78 of 1998 (NPS Act), which empowers the SARB to manage, regulate and oversee payment, clearing and settlement systems. Under the current in-force regime there is no PSD2-style… Full module →

Korea has no single EMI/PI regime; payments licensing is statute-by-statute and FSC-centred. The Electronic Financial Transactions Act (EFTA) is the governing instrument for most electronic financial business, with the FSC as primary licensing authority and… Full module →

Spain operates the standard EEA dual-route (bank/PI/EMI) regime under BdE supervision since 2018; 2025-2026 sanctions (Money Exchange SA, Divilo Fintech) show active enforcement of the prudential/own-funds floor.

CBSL is the sole payments regulator under the PSS Act No. 28 of 2005; card issuers/acquirers and mobile payment/e-money operators are licensed under the Payment Cards and Mobile Payment Systems Regulations No. 1 of 2013; money/value transfer service providers… Full module →

Sweden runs the standard EEA dual-track payments licensing regime under Finansinspektionen (FI): payment institutions under the Payment Services Act (2010:751) and e-money institutions under the Electronic Money Act (2011:755), each with a registered/exempt… Full module →

Switzerland has no payment-specific licensing regime equivalent to the EU's PSD2/EMD2. Payment activity is handled either lightly (AMLA/SRO affiliation for financial intermediaries) or via the Banking Act: the sandbox (deposits up to CHF 1m, no licence), the… Full module →

Taiwan's payments licensing regime rests on the 2015 Act Governing Electronic Payment Institutions (amended 2020, effective 1 July 2021), supervised by the FSC's Banking Bureau, alongside a parallel cross-border small-amount remittance authorisation track for… Full module →

Tanzania payments licensing anchored by NPS Act 2015 (Cap. 197) + BoT Act 2006; bank/non-bank split (s.15(2)(a) approval vs s.15(2)(b) licence); 5-year licences; bodies-corporate-incorporated-in-TZ requirement; TCRA licence for telco-based applicants… Full module →

PSA B.E. 2560 (2017) three-tier Designated Payment Service licensing under BOT; non-bank PI/EMI route distinct from bank s.36 FIBA e-money approval; foreign ownership generally capped at 49% without BOI approval.

The Central Bank of Tunisia (BCT) governs the payments/e-money space and in 2026 moved from purely permissive fintech oversight to an affirmative branding/technical-standard mandate via Circular No. 2026-132, establishing TUNPAY as the compulsory national… Full module →

Non-bank market access via PI and EMI licences under Law No. 6493 (2013); CBRT competent authority since 1 Jan 2020 (operational licensing from 18 Jan 2021); ~86 licensed PI/EMIs in 2024.

Uganda's payments licensing regime is anchored in the National Payment Systems Act, 2020 (NPSA) and the National Payment Systems Regulations, 2021, which vest the Bank of Uganda (BoU) with sole authority to license operators of payment systems, payment… Full module →

Ukraine's payment-services market is governed by the Law of Ukraine On Payment Services (No. 1591-IX), which entered into force (with certain provisions delayed) on 1 August 2022 and established the modern PSP/EMI licensing architecture supervised by the… Full module →

CBUAE unified onshore licensing under RPSCS (Circular 15/2021) with nine retail payment service categories; SVF licensed separately (Circular 6/2020, AED 15m min capital, 5% ACF, segregation); DIFC/ADGM outside CBUAE perimeter; CB Law 2025 (FDL No.6 of 2025)… Full module →

UK operates a post-Brexit non-bank PI/EMI authorisation regime supervised solely by the FCA. Payment institutions are authorised under the Payment Services Regulations 2017 (PSRs 2017, implementing PSD2); e-money issuers under the Electronic Money Regulations… Full module →

The US has NO single EMI/PI regime; it operates a dual federal/state model. Federally, money transmitters are 'Money Services Businesses' (MSBs) regulated by FinCEN under the Bank Secrecy Act; state-level Money Transmitter Licences (MTLs) authorise actual… Full module →

Alabama regulates money transmission (including virtual currency) under the Alabama Monetary Transmission Act (Ala. Code §8-7A-1 et seq.), administered by the Alabama Securities Commission (ASC) Registration Division, which replaced the 1961 Sale of Checks… Full module →

Alaska regulates payments/money-services activity exclusively through the Alaska Uniform Money Services Act (AS 06.55), administered by the Division of Banking and Securities (DBS) within the Dept. of Commerce, Community and Economic Development. There is no… Full module →

Arizona regulates money transmission under a dedicated state licence (ARS Title 6, Chapter 12) administered by the Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions (DIFI), following the 2022 CSBS Money Transmission Modernization Act adoption via SB1580… Full module →

Arkansas regulates money transmission and currency exchange under the Uniform Money Services Act (Ark. Code Ann. §23-55-101 et seq.), administered by the Arkansas Securities Department (ASD) via NMLS. The 2023 recodification (Act 442) adopted portions of the… Full module →

California has no single EMI/PI regime; market access for non-bank payment firms runs through the state Money Transmission Act (Cal. Fin. Code Div. 1.2, §2000 et seq.), administered by the DFPI via NMLS, layered on top of federal FinCEN MSB registration. The… Full module →

Colorado regulates payments/money transmission via a dual bank/non-bank state licensing model. Non-bank money transmitters are licensed and supervised by the DORA Division of Banking under the newly re-enacted Money Transmission Modernization Act (MTMA… Full module →

Connecticut regulates payments market access primarily through its Money Transmission Act (Conn. Gen. Stat. §§36a-595 et seq.), administered by the Department of Banking via NMLS, plus a novel Innovation Bank Charter for wholesale/non-deposit fintechs. No… Full module →

Delaware regulates money transmission and check-selling under the Delaware Money Transmitters Act (5 Del.C. Ch.23), administered by the Office of the State Bank Commissioner via NMLS; banks/credit unions/trust companies are exempt. A 2026 legislative package… Full module →

DC regulates payments licensing through DISB under the Money Transmitters Act of 2000 (DC Code Ch.26-10), a bank-vs-nonbank dual structure typical of the US state model, with DISB also chartering DC banks/trust companies; crypto/virtual-currency activity is… Full module →

Florida runs a non-bank money-transmission licensing regime under Chapter 560 (the Money Transmitters' Code), administered by the Office of Financial Regulation (OFR) Division of Consumer Finance, separate from a Chapter 663 international-banking regime for… Full module →

Georgia regulates money transmission and payment-instrument sale under a single non-depository licensing regime (O.C.G.A. §7-1-680 et seq.), administered by DBF via NMLS; bank-chartered entities are statutorily exempt. A new DBF-regulated category (litigation… Full module →

Hawaii regulates payments/money transmission through a single state-level nonbank licensing perimeter: the Money Transmitters Modernization Act (HRS Chapter 489D), administered by the Division of Financial Institutions (DFI) within DCCA. There is no separate… Full module →

Idaho regulates payments/money transmission through the Idaho Money Transmitters Act (Idaho Code Title 26, Chapter 29), administered by the Securities Bureau of the Idaho Department of Finance. Non-bank money transmitters, stored-value issuers/sellers and… Full module →

Illinois money transmission is governed by the Uniform Money Transmission Modernization Act (205 ILCS 658), effective Jan 1, 2026, with substantially raised surety-bond/net-worth thresholds and a payroll-processing safe harbor.

Indiana regulates payments licensing through DFI under the MTMA (SEA 458), effective 2024-01-01, replacing IC 28-8-4; virtual currency transmission excluded from scope.

Iowa regulates money transmission and currency exchange under Iowa Code Chapter 533C, administered by IDOB via NMLS; HF 675 (2023) modernized the Act; national banks now largely outside state licensing scope per 2026 OCC preemption guidance.

Kansas regulates payments/money transmission through the Office of the State Bank Commissioner (OSBC) under the Kansas Money Transmission Act (KMTA), which fully replaced the former Money Transmitter Act effective January 1, 2025 via HB 2560 (2024). Licensing… Full module →

Kentucky regulates money transmission (including stored value, prepaid, and virtual-currency transmission) under the Kentucky Money Transmitters Act of 2006 (KRS Chapter 286.11), administered by the Department of Financial Institutions (DFI) via NMLS. There… Full module →

Louisiana licenses money transmission under the Sale of Checks and Money Transmission Act (La. R.S. 6:1031 et seq.) through OFI via NMLS, with a $25,000 minimum surety bond and $100,000 net-worth threshold. This regime is superseded effective July 1, 2026 by… Full module →

Maine regulates money transmission (including virtual-currency business activity) under the MMTMA, 32 M.R.S. Chapter 79-A, enacted 2024. BCCP is the licensing/supervisory authority via NMLS, with a Sept 2025 shift to Electronic Surety Bonds. Bank-chartered… Full module →

Maryland regulates payments market access under a dual federal/state model. The Office of the Commissioner of Financial Regulation (OFR), within the Department of Labor, licenses money transmitters, check cashers, consumer/installment lenders and (from Oct… Full module →

Massachusetts moved from one of the least-regulated US states for money transmission to a fully licensed domestic+foreign regime under MGL c.169B (Chapter 312 of the Acts of 2024), implemented via 209 CMR 44.00 (effective Nov 7, 2025). The Division of Banks… Full module →

Michigan regulates money transmission under the state Money Transmission Services Act (2006 PA 250, MCL 487.1001-487.1047), administered by DIFS via NMLS, with tiered net-worth and surety-bond requirements and annual Dec 31 renewal. A pending 'Money… Full module →

Minnesota regulates payments/money-services entry through the Department of Commerce under a modernized Money Transmitters Act (Minn. Stat. Ch. 53B, enacted via the 2023 Money Transmission Modernization Act), a separate currency-exchange/check-cashing regime… Full module →

Mississippi regulates money transmission through the Department of Banking and Consumer Finance (DBCF) Nonbank Division under the new Money Transmission Modernization Act (MTMA, HB1428/SB2507), effective July 1, 2025, which repealed the legacy Mississippi… Full module →

Missouri regulates money transmission and payment-instrument sale through the Missouri Division of Finance under the 2024 Money Transmission Modernization Act (MTMA), which superseded the legacy Sale of Checks Law; licensing runs through NMLS; virtual… Full module →

Montana is the sole US state that does not operate a state-level money transmitter licensing regime; DBFI licenses adjacent activities under Title 32 MCA; a brief 2023 informal solicitation attempt was withdrawn.

Nebraska regulates money transmission (including stored value, payment instruments, and controllable-electronic-record/crypto kiosks) under the Nebraska Money Transmitters Act (Neb. Rev. Stat. §§8-2701 et seq.), administered by the Nebraska Department of… Full module →

Nevada regulates payments/money transmission via a dual-track non-bank licensing regime under NRS Chapter 671 (money transmission, administered by the Financial Institutions Division/NMLS) and NRS Chapter 669 (trust companies, used as the… Full module →

New Hampshire regulates money transmission under RSA 399-G, administered by the NH Banking Department via NMLS, with a licensing regime reenacted by HB 1241 (effective Oct. 22, 2024). Bank-chartered institutions are exempt; non-bank money transmitters… Full module →

New Jersey regulates payment activity through the state Money Transmitters Act administered by DOBI, with a distinct foreign money transmitter category and a nascent, not-yet-enacted Bureau of Securities-administered digital-asset licensing track under… Full module →

New Mexico regulates payments/money-services entry through the Uniform Money Services Act (NMSA 1978 Ch.58 Art.32), administered by FID; three license types cover money transmission, check cashing and currency exchange.

New York operates a dual federal/state regime. Non-bank money transmission requires a NYDFS Money Transmitter License under Article 13-B of the Banking Law (§§640-652-b) and Superintendent's Regulations Parts 406/416/417/300, administered via NMLS. Virtual… Full module →

North Carolina regulates money transmission (including stored value and virtual currency transmission) under the North Carolina Money Transmitters Act (NCGS Chapter 53, Article 16B), administered by NCCOB via NMLS; tiered net worth, surety bond, and… Full module →

North Dakota regulates money transmission under the Money Transmission Modernization Act (NDCC ch. 13-09.1, enacted 2023, replacing the older ch. 13-09), administered by the ND Department of Financial Institutions (NDDFI) via NMLS. Banks, credit unions and… Full module →

Ohio regulates money transmission under the state Money Transmitters Act (ORC Chapter 1315), administered by the Division of Financial Institutions (DFI) via NMLS. Licensure is required of any person receiving money for transmission from a person located in… Full module →

Oklahoma money transmission is now governed by the Oklahoma Money Transmission Modernization Act (HB 3521), enacted without the Governor's signature on 2026-05-13, repealing the former Financial Transaction Reporting Act (6 O.S. §§1511-1515) and recodifying… Full module →

Oregon regulates money transmission (incl. virtual-currency businesses, prepaid instrument sale, and check cashing) under a single non-bank licensing regime -- the Oregon Money Transmitters Act (ORS Chapter 717) -- administered by the Division of Financial… Full module →

Pennsylvania regulates money transmission (the bank-PSP vs non-bank route split point for payments) under the Money Transmission Business Licensing Law (Money Transmitter Act), 7 P.S. §§6101-6118, enforced by the Department of Banking and Securities (DoBS)… Full module →

Rhode Island regulates payments licensing through a state money-transmitter regime (RI Gen. Laws Title 19, Ch. 19-14 and 19-14.3), supervised by the Division of Banking within the Dept. of Business Regulation (DBR). Currency transmission, electronic money… Full module →

South Carolina regulates money transmission and currency exchange under the South Carolina Uniform Money Services Act, administered by the Attorney General's Money Services Division. The 2024 modernization (Act No. 218) adopted the MTMA model law. A 2026… Full module →

South Dakota regulates payments market access through the Division of Banking (Dept. of Labor & Regulation), which licenses money transmitters under SDCL Chapter 51A-17 (fully realigned to the CSBS Money Transmission Modernization Act by SB 58, effective July… Full module →

Tennessee regulates payments/money-services access through a dedicated Money Transmission Modernization Act (MTMA, TCA Title 45 Ch.7), administered by the Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions (TDFI) via NMLS. No EMI-style unified regime exists… Full module →

Texas regulates payments/money-transfer activity through a dual bank-charter and non-bank Money Services Business (MSB) licensing regime administered by the Texas Department of Banking (TDB) under Finance Code Chapter 151/152 (the Money Services Modernization… Full module →

Utah regulates money transmission under the Title 7, Chapter 25 Money Transmitter Act via the Department of Financial Institutions (DFI) using NMLS-based licensing, alongside a distinct and nationally significant Industrial Bank (ILC) charter regime that is… Full module →

Vermont regulates payments licensing through a single non-bank Money Transmitter License administered by DFR Banking Division under 8 V.S.A. Chapter 79, processed via NMLS, with Act 110 (2023-2024) conforming the regime to the CSBS Model Law.

Virginia regulates money transmission and money order selling exclusively under Title 6.2, Chapter 19 (Virginia Money Transmitters Act), administered by BFI/SCC via NMLS; no separate EMI/PPI charter. A 2025 legislative overhaul (effective July 1, 2026)… Full module →

Washington State regulates money transmission and currency exchange under the Uniform Money Services Act (RCW 19.230) and implementing rules at WAC 208-690, administered by DFI's Division of Consumer Services. No separate EMI/PI licence category; a single… Full module →

West Virginia regulates money transmission, currency exchange, currency transportation and check cashing under the West Virginia Money Transmitters Act (W. Va. Code Ch. 32A, Art. 2), administered by the Division of Financial Institutions (DFI) via NMLS… Full module →

Wisconsin regulates money transmission under Wis. Stat. ch. 217, administered by DFI via NMLS, replacing the Seller of Checks law effective 2025-01-01, extended in 2026 to cover virtual currency kiosk operators (2025 Act 226).

Wyoming operates a dual-track payments licensing regime: (1) a conventional state money-transmitter licence under the Wyoming Money Transmitter Act (W.S. Title 40, Ch. 22), NMLS-processed and Division of Banking-supervised, covering money transmitters… Full module →

Uruguay's payments licensing regime is anchored in Ley N°19.210 and the BCU's RNSP (Libro VII), creating the IEDE non-bank licence alongside the bank/IIF route; most recently updated via Circular 2.467/2024.

Venezuela's payments licensing regime is bifurcated: SUDEBAN (Superintendencia de las Instituciones del Sector Bancario) supervises banks and, since 2021, a dedicated fintech authorisation track (ITFB), while SUNACRIP separately licenses crypto-asset/VASP… Full module →

SBV is sole licensing authority under Decree 52/2024 + Circular 40/2024; non-bank firms use the 10-year IPS licence; capital VND 50bn (wallet/gateway) / VND 300bn (switching/clearing); banks act as payment service providers; no passport regime.

Zambia's payment licensing regime rests on the NPSA 2007, now being replaced by the National Payment System Act 2026 (pending commencement); BoZ is sole licensing/designating authority; foreign PSPs must obtain BoZ licensing regardless of physical presence… Full module →