Payments Vision Delivery Committee Update: The 11 September Deadline

ByOfficer

On 2 July 2026 the Payments Vision Delivery Committee published an update on roles and responsibilities in the future retail payments ecosystem. The FCA and PSR published same-day statements directing stakeholders to it, while HM Treasury published the update on GOV.UK. It reads like a background note. It is closer to a pricing document. The committee is describing how the commercial model for the UK’s next generation retail rails could work, where consumer protection sits, and how the fight against financial crime gets designed into the plumbing rather than bolted on later.

The reason it matters now is the calendar. The Retail Payments Infrastructure Board opened its consultation on the Design of the Future Retail Payments Infrastructure on 25 June 2026, and that consultation closes on 11 September 2026. The 2 July Payments Vision Delivery Committee update is context meant to be read alongside it. If your firm participates in or accesses Faster Payments today, the consultation may influence the future high-level design of the core infrastructure and the capabilities that participants may eventually need to support. It does not set future scheme fees or alter existing liability or reimbursement arrangements; commercial arrangements and implementation details remain subject to further work.

Related reading: RPIB consultation on the next generation UK retail payments infrastructure.

The dates that structure this programme

The National Payments Vision set a direction in late 2024, and the delivery machinery has been assembled in public since. A reporting or change team tracking this file needs the sequence, because each document narrows what the next one can say.

  • 14 November 2024: HM Treasury publishes the National Payments Vision, responding to the independent Future of Payments Review 2023 led by Joe Garner.
  • July 2025: the Payments Vision Delivery Committee sets out a new delivery model and confirms the Bank of England will establish and chair the Retail Payments Infrastructure Board.
  • November 2025: the committee publishes its Strategy for future retail payments infrastructure, aligned to the vision’s pillars of innovation, competition and security.
  • 26 February 2026: the committee publishes the Payments Forward Plan, sequencing initiatives across retail, wholesale and digital assets.
  • 25 June 2026: the Retail Payments Infrastructure Board opens its consultation on the Design of the Future Retail Payments Infrastructure.
  • 2 July 2026: the Payments Vision Delivery Committee publishes its update on roles and responsibilities in the future retail payments ecosystem.
  • 11 September 2026: the design consultation closes. This is the date on the action list.

Two July documents, and the one you actually respond to

The most common misread I expect on this file is treating the 2 July committee update as the thing to answer. The consultation is the Retail Payments Infrastructure Board paper published on 25 June, and that is where formal responses go before 11 September. The committee update is supporting material, written to help stakeholders interpret the design paper. Formal responses should be made to the RPIB consultation by 11 September 2026. The 2 July update is supporting material designed to be read alongside that consultation and is not itself a consultation, policy statement or regulatory guidance.

The two bodies do different jobs. The Payments Vision Delivery Committee brings together HM Treasury, the Bank of England, the FCA and the PSR to coordinate the regulators and make prioritisation calls. The Retail Payments Infrastructure Board is a senior advisory board chaired by the Bank of England, with a joint PSR/FCA observer, that translates the committee’s strategy into design through consultation with the wider ecosystem. Read the committee update for the intent behind a design choice, then respond to the board’s paper on the choice itself.

What the Payments Vision Delivery Committee update actually adds

The committee update sets out an illustrative view of how roles could evolve, so read it as a proposed shape rather than settled rules. The central idea is a split between a shared core and competitive layers on top. The illustrative model envisages a single core infrastructure scheme operator for the shared clearing and messaging capability, with governance intended to support appropriate independence and action in the best interests of the ecosystem and end-users. Around that core, product level arrangements would let firms compete on the services consumers and businesses actually touch.

The boundary between the core and separately provided services is one important design question in the RPIB consultation. The consultation asks which services and fraud-related capabilities should be delivered within the core and which should be provided separately. The core infrastructure itself would not determine final commercial pricing, create a new consumer-protection regime, or redefine liability and reimbursement models.

The commercial model question every participant should price

The update says the core infrastructure should operate as a utility and balance cost recovery with resilience and long-term investment. It says revenue would likely be generated through membership or participation fees, which could be paid by core participants and product-level arrangements. However, pricing and cost-recovery mechanisms require further assessment, and no mandatory two-layer fee structure has been established. Product-level arrangements may adopt different commercial models.

Treasury and finance teams can use the consultation to test possible cost allocations between core participation and product-level arrangements. The PVDC states that pricing and cost-recovery mechanisms require further assessment and development, so the consultation does not establish a final fee split or mandatory charging structure.

Where consumer protection and fraud liability land

The update treats consumer protection as an essential feature of the ecosystem, with effective dispute resolution and a core that enables regulatory compliance while supporting different protection levels across arrangements. On financial crime, it expects the scheme to comply with anti money laundering and fraud regulation and to design controls throughout, with product arrangements adding enhanced protections calibrated to risk.

Read that against the existing APP reimbursement framework. Since 7 October 2024, the Faster Payments requirement has required sending PSPs to reimburse eligible individuals, microenterprises and charities in most cases.

If requested by the sending PSP, the receiving PSP must pay 50% of the lower of the amount paid to the victim that is attributable to payments made to that receiving PSP and the required reimbursement amount attributable to those payments. The maximum is GBP 85,000 per claim. A sending PSP may apply an excess of up to GBP 100, but not where the victim was a vulnerable consumer when making the reimbursable payment and that vulnerability materially affected the victim’s ability to protect themselves from the scam.

The RPIB consultation asks which consumer-protection and fraud-related capabilities should be prioritised within the core, but it expressly states that the core would not create a new consumer-protection regime or redefine liability or reimbursement models. Firms should respond on enabling capabilities such as fraud analytics, data sharing and dispute management without treating the existing APP reimbursement requirement or liability arrangements as open for reallocation. Supervisory expectations on financial crime controls for regulated firms are addressed separately in the FCA’s June 2026 financial crime messaging, relevant context alongside this consultation.

Faster Payments keeps running while the new rails are built

Nothing in the June and July documents switches Faster Payments off. Pay.UK keeps its central role operating the existing retail interbank systems, which means Faster Payments, Bacs and the Image Clearing System continue in a safe and resilient way while the future design is settled. The new infrastructure would be developed and delivered by a separate, industry led Delivery Company, with the intent that new capability arrives over time, across a managed transition.

The functional prize is what the consultation puts on the table. Alongside existing capability, the future core could enable account to account payments at the point of sale as an additional option to cards, and better cross border payments, giving users more choice and faster, smoother journeys. The RPIB says migration is likely to run in parallel, subject to transition planning, and describes a time-limited dual-running period as one possible approach. Its roadmap is indicative and does not prejudge sequencing, timing or implementation. Firms can use parallel operation as a planning scenario, but should not treat it as a settled migration requirement or rule out other cutover approaches before the transition plan is agreed.

The regulator map is being redrawn under the same programme

The redraw of roles reaches past scheme operators and delivery companies. The supervisory perimeter is moving too. In March 2025 the government announced it would abolish the PSR and consolidate its functions into the FCA. HM Treasury published its consultation, A Streamlined Approach to Payment Systems Regulation, in September 2025, and it closed on 20 October 2025.

In its response the government confirmed it intends to proceed. The Financial Services and Markets Bill, which abolishes the PSR and transfers its functions to the FCA, was introduced in the House of Lords on 19 May 2026 and had its second reading on 8 June 2026, so the enabling primary legislation is now before Parliament rather than merely awaited. The PSR still exists and still regulates today, so treat this as a confirmed direction of travel that still needs legislation. It has not happened yet.

That matters for how you read the committee itself. The PSR sits on the Payments Vision Delivery Committee, while the FCA and PSR jointly hold the observer role on the Retail Payments Infrastructure Board. As its functions move into the FCA, the FCA’s weight in payments supervision grows, and the split of duties between the two regulators that you rely on for questions like reporting and enforcement will be redrawn. Firms that map their regulatory relationships as part of governance should flag the PSR to FCA transition as a live dependency. The government’s consultation response states that it does not intend to alter the Bank of England’s or PRA’s payment-system functions and that regulatory coordination will remain important as the PSR’s functions move to the FCA.

Messaging and connectivity: the build follows the design

The consultation is described as covering the core clearing and messaging infrastructure. Messaging is where a design choice becomes an engineering programme, so it deserves attention even though the paper does not lock a standard. The wholesale precedent is instructive. The Bank of England migrated CHAPS and its Real Time Gross Settlement service to the ISO 20022 messaging standard on 19 June 2023, and from May 2025 it began mandating purpose codes and legal entity identifiers on CHAPS payments between financial institutions. That is the direction of travel for structured payment data in the UK.

For retail, the standard and the connectivity model are among the open choices in the design consultation, which the paper puts up for debate. The operational point for a change team is that whatever messaging model the core adopts will drive a data mapping and testing programme across your payment stack, your sanctions and fraud screening, and your reconciliation. You cannot scope that build until the design is chosen, but you can influence the design so the build is one you can actually deliver. Firms that sat out the wholesale ISO 20022 debate and inherited a mapping they disliked have a reason to engage this time.

What to map before 11 September

A consultation response is only as good as the internal analysis behind it. In my experience the work that turns a design paper into a credible response is a mapping exercise, not a drafting exercise, and it lands on the reporting and change desk because that is where the operational detail lives. A workable order of tasks looks like this.

Read the 25 June design consultation and the 2 July committee update together, and identify which services or capabilities could sit within the core or be provided separately. Model alternative fee scenarios rather than assuming a mandatory two-layer charge, because pricing has not been set. Map existing APP reimbursement obligations separately and consider which fraud analytics, data-sharing and dispute-management capabilities should be supported by the core.

Sketch the messaging and connectivity build each plausible design would trigger, so you can argue for the one you can deliver. Log the PSR to FCA transition as a supervisory dependency that affects reporting relationships. Then write the response around the two or three design choices that move your numbers most, and keep the marginal questions short.

None of this is a reporting change on its own. The 2 July update and the 25 June consultation create no new return and impose no immediate filing obligation. What they create is a design window, and the firms that map their exposure now will write sharper responses than those that treat the July note as background reading.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the 2 July Payments Vision Delivery Committee update something my firm has to respond to?

The update itself is supporting context; the consultation is a separate document. Formal responses go to the Retail Payments Infrastructure Board’s Design of the Future Retail Payments Infrastructure consultation, which opened on 25 June 2026 and closes on 11 September 2026. Read the update to understand the committee’s intent, then respond to the design paper.

Does this mean Faster Payments is being switched off?

No. Pay.UK continues to operate Faster Payments, Bacs and the Image Clearing System while the future infrastructure is designed and built by a separate industry led Delivery Company. Plan for a period of parallel running across a managed transition.

Who pays for the new core infrastructure?

The illustrative model says the core should operate as a utility and that revenue would likely come from membership or participation fees, potentially paid by core participants and product-level arrangements. The PVDC states that pricing and cost-recovery mechanisms require further assessment, so firms should model alternative scenarios rather than assume a mandatory two-layer charge. The UK’s open banking commercial variable recurring payments scheme already shows how a competitive product layer can price differently from the underlying rail.

What happens to authorised push payment fraud reimbursement under the new design?

The Faster Payments APP reimbursement requirement took effect on 7 October 2024, with reimbursement costs shared 50:50 between sending and receiving PSPs and a maximum reimbursement level of GBP 85,000 per claim. The consultation asks which consumer-protection and fraud-related capabilities should be prioritised within the core, but it does not propose moving or redefining the legal reimbursement obligation.

Is the PSR being abolished, and when?

The government announced in March 2025 that it intends to consolidate the PSR into the FCA, and confirmed it will proceed after its 2025 consultation. The change requires primary legislation, and the Financial Services and Markets Bill that abolishes the PSR and transfers its functions to the FCA was introduced in the House of Lords on 19 May 2026 and is progressing through Parliament, so the PSR still regulates payments today. Treat it as a confirmed direction that still needs its legislation.

Will the new infrastructure use ISO 20022?

The messaging standard for the future retail core is a design choice still open in the consultation. The wholesale precedent is that CHAPS and RTGS moved to ISO 20022 on 19 June 2023, with purpose codes and legal entity identifiers mandated from May 2025, which signals the direction for structured payment data in the UK.

Does the RPIB build and run the new rails?

No. The Retail Payments Infrastructure Board is a senior advisory board that translates strategy into a high-level design. The industry-led Delivery Company is intended to take forward procurement, funding and delivery of the future infrastructure. The July 2026 update describes the future core infrastructure scheme operator separately and does not identify the Delivery Company as the eventual operator. Pay.UK continues to operate the existing systems during the transition.

Related Articles

Key Takeaways

  • The action item is the Retail Payments Infrastructure Board’s Design of the Future Retail Payments Infrastructure consultation, open 25 June 2026 and closing 11 September 2026. The 2 July Payments Vision Delivery Committee update is context to read alongside it.
  • The design splits a shared core clearing and messaging utility from competitive product level arrangements. The core versus product boundary is one open design question; it does not itself decide final pricing, liability or reimbursement models.
  • The PVDC illustrates possible fees for membership or participation in the core and different commercial models for product-level arrangements. Pricing, cost recovery and the allocation of charges remain subject to further assessment.
  • The Faster Payments APP reimbursement requirement took effect on 7 October 2024, with reimbursement costs shared 50:50 between sending and receiving PSPs and a maximum reimbursement level of GBP 85,000 per claim. The consultation asks which supporting consumer-protection and fraud capabilities should be included in the core; it does not reopen or reallocate the legal reimbursement obligation.
  • Faster Payments, Bacs and the Image Clearing System keep running under Pay.UK. Plan for parallel running across a managed transition.
  • The PSR is set to consolidate into the FCA, confirmed after the 2025 consultation; the Financial Services and Markets Bill enabling the move was introduced in the House of Lords on 19 May 2026 and is still before Parliament. Log it as a supervisory dependency.
  • Messaging and connectivity remain open design choices, though the CHAPS and RTGS move to ISO 20022 on 19 June 2023 signals the UK direction for structured data.
  • None of this is a new reporting return today. It is a design window, and mapped exposure makes for a sharper response.

Sources and References

  • FCA, Payments Vision Delivery Committee update on future retail payments infrastructure (statement, 2 July 2026): fca.org.uk
  • GOV.UK, Payments Vision Delivery Committee update: Roles and Responsibilities in the future Retail Payments Ecosystem (2 July 2026): gov.uk
  • HM Treasury, National Payments Vision (14 November 2024): gov.uk
  • GOV.UK, Payments Vision Delivery Committee update (July 2025 delivery model): gov.uk
  • GOV.UK, Strategy for future retail payments infrastructure (November 2025): gov.uk
  • Bank of England, RPIB consultation on the Design of the Future Retail Payments Infrastructure (25 June 2026): bankofengland.co.uk
  • Bank of England, RPIB launches consultation on the next generation UK payments infrastructure (news, June 2026): bankofengland.co.uk
  • Bank of England, The Retail Payments Infrastructure Board (RPIB): bankofengland.co.uk
  • PSR, Payments Vision Delivery Committee update on future retail payments infrastructure (2 July 2026): psr.org.uk
  • HM Treasury, A Streamlined Approach to Payment Systems Regulation, consultation (ran 8 September to 20 October 2025): gov.uk
  • HM Treasury, A Streamlined Approach to Payment Systems Regulation, consultation response: gov.uk
  • UK Parliament, Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL] 2026-27 (introduced in the House of Lords 19 May 2026; abolishes the PSR and transfers its functions to the FCA): bills.parliament.uk
  • PSR, PS24/7 Faster Payments APP scams reimbursement requirement, maximum level of reimbursement: psr.org.uk
  • Bank of England, ISO 20022 within CHAPS and RTGS (RTGS Renewal Programme): bankofengland.co.uk

Reading the two documents as one brief

The 2 July committee update is supporting context designed to be read alongside the 25 June design consultation. The consultation seeks views on the high-level design, including boundaries between core infrastructure and separately provided services, while commercial pricing, liability arrangements and implementation remain subject to further work. Firms can use the response window to assess operational dependencies and provide evidence on the design choices that affect them. Responses are due by 11 September 2026.

Last updated: July 2026

Disclaimer: The information on RegReportingDesk.com is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal, regulatory, tax, or compliance advice. Always consult your compliance officer, legal counsel, or the relevant supervisory authority for guidance specific to your institution.

Similar Posts