Skip to content
Magist
AnalyzeRegulationsVendorsCounselUpdatesCompareAbout
← All Controls

Customer funds safeguarding

safeguarding-customer-fundsDomain: paymentsType: process

Description

A working safeguarding program enforces the legal premise that customer funds held by a payments institution or e-money issuer are not the institution's funds. The components are segregation of those funds in a dedicated account at a regulated credit institution (or in approved liquid assets, depending on the regime), daily reconciliation between the customer-liability ledger and the safeguarding-account balance, and a documented insolvency-protection mechanism (usually a statutory trust or equivalent guarantee) that survives the institution's own failure. The regimes layer with similar shapes and different specifics. PSD2 Article 10 covers payment institutions; EMD2 Article 7 covers e-money institutions with end-of-business-day-after-receipt segregation. MiCA Article 75 extends an analogous regime to crypto-asset service providers, with separate accounting expected for fiat holdings versus custodied crypto-assets. The UK FCA framework (PSRs 2017 Regulation 23 and EMRs 2011 Regulations 20-22) sits on a comparable structure, with the 2024 Dear CEO letter and the Modulr and Pockit enforcement actions tightening reconciliation and qualifying-account expectations meaningfully. US state Money Transmitter Licenses operate on a permissible-investment list (cash equivalents, US government securities, qualifying bank deposits) with quarterly or monthly reconciliation, and post-FTX, Voyager, and Celsius the state regulators have collectively tightened scrutiny on segregation in practice. The insolvency angle gives this regime its bite. The customer of a safeguarded institution is not a creditor of the institution in the ordinary unsecured-claim sense; the safeguarding regime exists to make that legal posture operationally enforceable when the regulator arrives during a wind-down. Reconciliation breaks are the commonly-seen enforcement trigger. A one-off break with a documented cause and a same-day correction reads as operational noise; a sustained break reads as evidence the segregation is theoretical rather than actual, and that is the finding that draws supervisory action. Evidence formats that hold up include safeguarding-account bank statements signed by the credit institution, daily reconciliation reports keyed to the customer-liability ledger, and external auditor confirmations against both ledgers.

Applicability

Applies when: sector is fintech.

How predicates are evaluated

Required by (5 regulations)

  • PSD2

    Article 10 — safeguarding requirements for payment institutions.

    Directive (EU) 2015/2366

  • US MTL

    Per-state permissible-investment requirements; cash equivalents + US government securities + qualifying bank deposits; quarterly/monthly reconciliation; post-FTX-Voyager-Celsius regulator attention on segregation.

    Bank Secrecy Act, 31 U.S.C. §§5311-5336; 31 CFR Chapter X; per-state Money Transmitter Acts

    Source →

  • EU EMD2

    EMD2 Article 7 — safeguarding by end-of-business-day-after-receipt; segregation in qualifying credit institution OR insurance/guarantee; 2024 EBA Guidelines tightened operational expectations.

    Directive 2009/110/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009

    Source →

  • EU MiCA

    MiCA Article 75 custody-of-crypto-assets segregation + recordkeeping + daily reconciliation; parallel framework for client-fund-safeguarding in CASP services involving fiat-currency holdings.

    Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2023

    Source →

  • UK FCA Payments

    PSRs 2017 Regulation 23 + EMRs 2011 Regulations 20-22 — segregation in safeguarding account at authorized credit institution OR insurance/guarantee; 2024 FCA Dear CEO letter tightened reconciliation + qualifying-account expectations; recent FCA enforcement actions (Modulr, Pockit) signal supervisory attention.

    Payment Services Regulations 2017 (SI 2017/752); Electronic Money Regulations 2011 (SI 2011/99); FCA Handbook

    Source →

Fulfilled by (1)

  • In-house build · high effort

Magist does not accept payment from vendors. Methodology.

Evidence formats

  • safeguarding bank statements
  • daily reconciliation reports
  • auditor confirmations

Magist provides legal information based on publicly available regulatory sources. It does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before making compliance decisions.

Magist

Pre-launch regulatory analysis for product teams. Built by a lawyer, designed for PMs.

Tools

  • Analyze
  • Guided walkthrough
  • Vendors
  • Find counsel
  • Saved analyses

Reference

  • Scope by business model
  • Scope by jurisdiction
  • App ratings
  • Regulations
  • Compare regulations
  • Enforcement
  • Browse Controls
  • Vendor coverage
  • Radar
  • Pulse
  • Changelog
  • Guides
  • Regulatory updates
  • Open data
  • Corpus license
  • Ontology
  • State of Compliance

Solutions

  • For legal teams
  • For engineering
  • For executives
  • For law firms
  • For investors
  • For teams →

About

  • About Magist
  • Methodology
  • Editorial standards
  • Reviewers
  • Coverage status
  • Corrections
  • Trust
  • Coverage scope
  • How we handle data
  • Sub-processors
  • FAQ

Built by Neel Patel, a practicing in-house games attorney. Games touch more compliance domains at once than anything else in tech — Magist was designed around that.

Magist provides legal information based on publicly available regulatory sources. It does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before making compliance decisions. Operated by a Washington-licensed attorney. Not licensed in California or other US states. Magist provides legal information; consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

Magist is an instrument, not a consultancy. It does not sell compliance services or take payment from vendors for placement; the analysis is the same for everyone. No vendor, sponsorship, or referral fees, ever.

MethodologyLimitationsDisclosures

© 2026 Magist
TermsLicensePrivacySecurityLinkedIn