Abstract

The article describes one of the business models of non-bank payment service providers (PSP) that occurs in market practice. This model assumes that the same PSP simultaneously provides an acquiring service to a payee (e.g. a seller of goods) and a PIS service to a payer (e.g. a buyer). The same PSP is therefore both the acquirer and the TPP-PIS service provider. In practice, it happens that this model turns out to be unprofitable for the TPP (acquirer), as the bank keeping the account for such a PSP charges a fee on incoming transfers to such an account. In turn, the described model may naturally generate a significant number of transactions in such an account, which will entail the need for the TPP (acquirer) to bear the aforementioned fees. The applicable legal framework allows, in principle, such fees to be levied. Indeed, it is the rules of the provision of the PIS service that are protected by law rather than specific business models adopted by a PSP as such.