Risk-free national payment system, or I want an account with the Central Bank of the Russian Federation
Hello honorable ladies and gentlemen.
The time of payment between legal entities in Russia is usually about a day. In my opinion, with the current level of technology development, this is ridiculous. This is due to the payment system scheme inherited from the last century.
Counterpart A → Bank A → Central Bank of the Russian Federation → Bank B → Counterpart B
In addition, such a scheme has a fundamental flaw: risky lending operations are combined in the same structure with the national payment system, which should function without risks. Maybe it's time to change it, or, most likely, to add to the state in which it will not be exposed to banking crises.
')
The idea is simple to banality, so I apologize if for someone it is not new. The modern scheme of the national payment system, perhaps, should look like this.
Counterparty → Internet → Provider → Open Access Standards → Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Settlement Bank of the Russian Federation)
The difference lies in the fact that the Counterparty (legal and physical person) has an account not in a commercial bank, but directly in the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (I would rather call it the Settlement Bank of the Russian Federation). The Provider is a provider of Internet services for managing a settlement account in the Settlement Bank of the Russian Federation (based on its software) and does not have direct access to the Counterparty's money. The provider can be any legal entity that stratifies its software to meet Open Standards.
The result is a national system of instant payments, and the Open Standards for the Services of the Settlement Bank of the Russian Federation will enable the formation of a competitive market for access to the national payment system.
There are many advantages: speed, one account for the whole "life" of the counterparty, multiple access (access can be tied to a bank card, phone, iris, and UEC), resistance to crisis in the economy, etc. d.
It is clear that such a payment system can only serve non-cash payments, so it should not replace, but complement (or operate in parallel) the existing payment system.
Please tell me at least one drawback of such a national payment system?
PS I understand that the idea is delusional (and I did too much with the provocative heading, so I corrected it). But, as Niels Bohr used to say: the crazier, the truer. I understand that in the short term, the system is in principle not realizable. I propose to consider it as an abstract (even without being tied to Russia and its laws) and another (!) Banking system, which has no analogue in the world.
Why is it needed:
1. The system is not profitable commercial banks. But it is beneficial to legal entities that do not suffer in the bankruptcy of commercial banks. The question is what is more important - trade and production or the banking sector. The answer is not obvious.
2. In the economy, trade is becoming faster, and GDP is greater.
The main threat of implementation: If you can not build an IT system for processing requests from across the country - the question is closed. But, if in principle it is possible, then this is an IT challenge at the state level, and the answer is cool.
National payment system in large strokes: Open accounts through Providers (in the diagram) once in a person’s life and organization. No paper extracts and paperwork at all. For those interested in payment links to payment on the Internet site of the system. Too large payments and too frequent unicast small ones to slow down to fight dark operations (I think it would be even easier to fight in a single system with a cashing in). System staff is not small. But from the point of view of the national economy as a whole, it will be less than the one that now provides payments in banks.
The time of payment between legal entities in Russia is usually about a day. In my opinion, with the current level of technology development, this is ridiculous. This is due to the payment system scheme inherited from the last century.
Counterpart A → Bank A → Central Bank of the Russian Federation → Bank B → Counterpart B
In addition, such a scheme has a fundamental flaw: risky lending operations are combined in the same structure with the national payment system, which should function without risks. Maybe it's time to change it, or, most likely, to add to the state in which it will not be exposed to banking crises.
')
The idea is simple to banality, so I apologize if for someone it is not new. The modern scheme of the national payment system, perhaps, should look like this.
Counterparty → Internet → Provider → Open Access Standards → Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Settlement Bank of the Russian Federation)
The difference lies in the fact that the Counterparty (legal and physical person) has an account not in a commercial bank, but directly in the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (I would rather call it the Settlement Bank of the Russian Federation). The Provider is a provider of Internet services for managing a settlement account in the Settlement Bank of the Russian Federation (based on its software) and does not have direct access to the Counterparty's money. The provider can be any legal entity that stratifies its software to meet Open Standards.
The result is a national system of instant payments, and the Open Standards for the Services of the Settlement Bank of the Russian Federation will enable the formation of a competitive market for access to the national payment system.
There are many advantages: speed, one account for the whole "life" of the counterparty, multiple access (access can be tied to a bank card, phone, iris, and UEC), resistance to crisis in the economy, etc. d.
It is clear that such a payment system can only serve non-cash payments, so it should not replace, but complement (or operate in parallel) the existing payment system.
Please tell me at least one drawback of such a national payment system?
PS I understand that the idea is delusional (and I did too much with the provocative heading, so I corrected it). But, as Niels Bohr used to say: the crazier, the truer. I understand that in the short term, the system is in principle not realizable. I propose to consider it as an abstract (even without being tied to Russia and its laws) and another (!) Banking system, which has no analogue in the world.
Why is it needed:
1. The system is not profitable commercial banks. But it is beneficial to legal entities that do not suffer in the bankruptcy of commercial banks. The question is what is more important - trade and production or the banking sector. The answer is not obvious.
2. In the economy, trade is becoming faster, and GDP is greater.
The main threat of implementation: If you can not build an IT system for processing requests from across the country - the question is closed. But, if in principle it is possible, then this is an IT challenge at the state level, and the answer is cool.
National payment system in large strokes: Open accounts through Providers (in the diagram) once in a person’s life and organization. No paper extracts and paperwork at all. For those interested in payment links to payment on the Internet site of the system. Too large payments and too frequent unicast small ones to slow down to fight dark operations (I think it would be even easier to fight in a single system with a cashing in). System staff is not small. But from the point of view of the national economy as a whole, it will be less than the one that now provides payments in banks.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/203670/
All Articles