Hi embedded finance friend!
I screwed up some email settings, and many of you did not receive last week’s newsletter. Sorry! To make up for this, I decided to send the next edition (this one!) already one week later instead of the usual biweekly rhythm. And this gives me the great opportunity to test a weekly cadence, something that I have been thinking about for a bit. Do you prefer a biweekly or weekly Embedded Finance Review? Feel free to reply or use the survey at the end of the newsletter.
You can find the newsletter from last week here. There are many interesting stories to read, but a few things to highlight:
But let’s dive into this edition:
.
Join FTT Embedded Finance & Super-Apps this May and meet 600+ innovators from retailers, marketplaces, brands, financial institutions and tech providers. Immerse yourself in the latest industry trends and gain invaluable insights from industry leaders that will give you a competitive edge. Embedded Finance Review is an industry partner. Register now.
The 16 different German states have decided to introduce (sorry, all links in this post link to German websites) a payment card for refugees (two out of the 16 have a slightly different approach than the rest, but all will introduce the card). The card will replace cash payouts from the authorities to refugees, and instead, the refugee will receive a pre-funded debit card that can be used to spend the financial benefits. The offering is purely card-based, and no bank account will be made available.
While there are some benefits in terms of limiting card usage (i.e., blocking gambling facilities), the main beneficiaries are likely the authorities that will have an easier system to payout and manage benefits for refugees. As an outsider with limited knowledge, it is hard to quantify the benefits of cashless payouts to refugees, but when a country like Germany chooses cards over cash, the benefits are likely big ;-)
As a frequent reader of this newsletter, you might remember news in the past few weeks where certain German cities or regions introduced a ‘SocialCard’ already. Those were the first movers that cooperated with the company Publk (or trading name SocialCard) to introduce such a card. The decision of the 16 German states to introduce a payment card does not necessarily mean that all of them will cooperate with Publk / SocialCard; however, the company is in a very good position to win many of the tenders that will be happening soon. Their CEO, Joerg Schwittwala, shares in a podcast some further details about the product offering.
The payment card for refuguees is a great example where a card is being used as a way of transferring fund ownership to another party. You could argue that a corporate expense card serves exactly the same purpose. In this case, the employee can make a transaction without needing to receive cash from her employer. I would assume that similar benefits could be brought to caretakers and their organisations in cases where they are legally responsible for the financial situation of the individuals under their care and pay out “pocket money” on a regular basis.
Note: If you are wondering how a payment card for refugees falls into the definition of embedded finance, I agree with you. Obviously, this product is not ‘embedded’ into a non-financial offering; nevertheless, I believe this is a good example of parties that historically have not offered payment or banking products but are now doing so for efficiency reasons.
Europe
North America
.
International research company Celent has published a report, commissioned by ClearBank, showing that €35 billion of customer deposits are now held by e-money institutions. E-money institutions (EMI) started to emerge after September 2020, when the Electronic Money Directive (EMD) was adopted with the goal of creating “a 'narrow bank’ type that would have a smaller capital requirement and whose activities would be confined to the issuing of e-money.”
All of us have likely used (or are currently using) an e-money-powered solution, either from a fintech or a non-financial brand. What is important to know about e-money institutions is that they are not banks, and thus, they cannot lend or pay interest on deposits (but there are workarounds in some cases). In order to protect customer funds, every single EMI needs to have a safeguarding account with an ‘actual’ bank. This can be a pure infrastructure bank or any other high-street bank. In addition to safeguarding funds, the bank often provides other services, such as access to banking or payment rails, to the EMI as well.
It is quite clear that EMIs have been an important driver of fintech and embedded finance in the past few years, but there are also many challenges to the model. The most obvious ones are the narrow scope of issuing e-money and not being able to lend money, which is often the most important way for a bank to make revenue. Additionally, the involvement of a bank behind the EMI can cause friction as well. I am not indicating that the concept of EMI is doomed, but there are benefits (and challenges) working with banks directly. EMIs have often been the clear choice in the past for the product launches; will this change now?
Europe
North America
Australia
Update: I rebranded the job board. It is now a community section, which will still include relevant jobs. Overall, I envision that Embedded Finance Review will offer more and more community features over time, since I believe it can offer massive value - likely more than content. If you agree with me, please help me with content, links, questions, quotes and other things to make it a true ‘community section’.