E-Money Regulation and EMI Compliance
Specialist advice for electronic money institutions, applicants and investors
E-money regulation has become increasingly complex as consumer payment behaviours shift towards digital wallets, prepaid cards and stored value products. Bratby Law advises firms on product classification, FCA authorisation, safeguarding obligations and the evolving regulatory perimeter for electronic money issuers under the Electronic Money Regulations 2011. As General Counsel to UK Payments Initiative, we stay ahead of regulatory change affecting the e-money sector, including forthcoming payments law reform and the FCA’s enhanced supervisory approach.
When does e-money regulation become an issue?
E-money regulation becomes relevant the moment you consider issuing electronic money. This might be a prepaid card product, a digital wallet, or any stored value arrangement where customers deposit money in advance. You must determine whether your product constitutes electronic money under the EMRs 2011 or whether it falls within a different regulatory perimeter.
If it does, you will need either FCA authorisation as an electronic money institution or registration as a small electronic money institution, depending on your anticipated transaction volume and business model. Existing EMIs now face new obligations under the Supplementary Regime for safeguarding, effective May 2026, which fundamentally changes how e-money float must be held and managed. Private equity investors in e-money businesses must understand the capital and prudential requirements before acquisition. Firms operating across the UK and European Economic Area encounter additional complexity, since EU proposals to reform the E-Money Directive are currently under review and UK divergence is increasing. Distribution chains for e-money products introduce regulatory responsibility that cannot be outsourced and require careful agent governance.
Why e-money regulation matters now
The regulatory environment for e-money issuers has shifted materially. The FCA’s new safeguarding Supplementary Regime, published as PS25/12 and effective from 7 May 2026, requires daily reconciliation of e-money float, monthly regulatory returns, annual audits, and the appointment of a named senior manager responsible for safeguarding. These requirements apply equally to electronic money institutions and small electronic money institutions, reflecting the FCA’s view that safeguarding is a core operational function rather than a compliance task.
The FCA has also made clear that the Consumer Duty applies to e-money issuers. This means EMIs must demonstrate fair value, ensure consumer understanding of terms, and provide appropriate support and channels for complaints. Enforcement activity over the past two years shows the FCA taking a firm line on poor safeguarding and weak consumer protections.
HM Treasury is expected to launch a payments law consultation in the second quarter of 2026, which may reshape the EMRs framework and the relationship between e-money and payment services regulation. Separately, EU legislative proposals to repeal the E-Money Directive and consolidate electronic money into a reformed payments services framework have created substantial regulatory uncertainty. The UK is unlikely to follow the EU’s direction, increasing the risk of long-term divergence. For EMIs with cross-border ambitions, this divergence requires dual compliance regimes and careful governance of which products and services apply in which jurisdictions.
Where e-money issuers get it wrong
The most common mistake is product misclassification. Firms confuse stored value arrangements, electronic money, and payment accounts, leading to applications for the wrong authorisation or attempts to operate without authorisation altogether. A prepaid card scheme, for example, may or may not constitute e-money depending on its technical structure and whether money is held on behalf of the customer. A digital wallet may fall within electronic money or within payment services, depending on whether it stores funds or merely facilitates payments from a linked account.
A second common error is the mirror assumption: firms apply for payment institution authorisation because their product looks similar to other payment services, only to discover that the product actually constitutes electronic money and requires a different authorisation route. The reverse error also occurs: an EMI registration may be pursued when a payment services authorisation is more appropriate.
Safeguarding is frequently misunderstood. The e-money safeguarding regime differs materially from payment services safeguarding, principally because e-money holders have a redemption right: they can demand their money back at any time, and the issuer must be able to meet that demand. This creates operational complexity that many issuers underestimate. Capital requirements for EMI authorisation are also frequently misjudged; firms either significantly over-capitalise or discover they fall short of the minimum requirements mid-way through a build.
Distribution arrangements create a fourth category of error. E-money distribution through agents is permitted under the EMRs, but the regulatory responsibility for agent compliance cannot be outsourced. A firm that appoints distribution agents without robust oversight, training and monitoring exposes itself to enforcement risk and liability for agent misconduct. Finally, many EMIs have not begun to prepare for the new safeguarding regime, despite the May 2026 deadline. Operational readiness takes months and requires investment in banking relationships, systems and governance infrastructure.
What good looks like
A well-structured e-money programme starts with rigorous product classification. Before any investment in systems or marketing, confirm with absolute certainty whether the product constitutes electronic money, and if so, whether small EMI or full EMI authorisation is the right route. Build the regulatory structure before the product, not after. Many firms operate in the wrong regulatory perimeter for months or years because classification was deferred.
Treat safeguarding as operational infrastructure, not as a compliance overlay applied after the business model is designed. This means designing the product architecture, the banking relationships, the payment flows and the redemption mechanics around safeguarding from the outset. Embed reconciliation, monitoring and governance into daily operations rather than treating them as end-of-month administrative tasks. Agent and distributor oversight should be designed as a core governance function from launch. Create clear written policies for agent conduct, training, monitoring and termination, backed by contractual controls and regular audits.
Plan for regulatory change. HM Treasury payments law consultations and FCA supervisory priorities will shape the e-money perimeter over the next five years. Firms that stay connected to regulatory development and adjust quickly will compete more effectively than those that react only after new rules are published. Our General Counsel appointment at UK Payments Initiative provides direct exposure to how payment firms are managing these obligations in practice and anticipating change.
When to instruct an e-money regulation specialist
Engage early when you need product classification and regulatory perimeter advice. Instruct before you appoint agents or distributors, to ensure the oversight framework is correctly designed from the outset. If you are an existing EMI preparing for the new safeguarding regime, specialist input is valuable to gap-analyse your current arrangements against PS25/12 and plan a readiness programme. PE investors should commission due diligence on e-money businesses through a specialist lens, particularly on safeguarding maturity and regulatory relationships. Transaction support for acquisitions and funding rounds benefits from counsel that understands both the EMRs and the payment services perimeter.
How Bratby Law helps with e-money regulation
We provide e-money product classification and regulatory perimeter analysis, starting with a detailed assessment of your product features against the EMRs definition of electronic money and the payments services perimeter. Our analysis covers the distinction between stored value, e-money and payment accounts, and clarifies which authorisation route is appropriate.
For firms pursuing authorisation, we advise on FCA authorisation and registration for EMIs and small EMIs. This covers preparation of the FCA application, governance and risk management frameworks, financial projections and capital adequacy, business model and customer due diligence procedures, and management of the FCA’s information requests and pre-authorisation supervision.
We design safeguarding frameworks that embed the regulatory requirements into operational practice. This includes banking relationships, reconciliation and monitoring protocols, senior manager designation, audit readiness and the resolution pack for wind-down.
For multi-channel issuers, we advise on distribution and agent oversight, covering agent appointment criteria, written policies and procedures, training, monitoring, audit and termination protocols. We help firms embed regulatory responsibility into their agent network so that control is maintained despite the decentralised nature of distribution.
We also advise on Consumer Duty implementation for e-money products, helping firms understand fair value, consumer understanding and consumer support in the e-money context.
Where regulatory change affects your business, we provide regulatory change management advice, including impact assessment for new FCA rules, HM Treasury consultations and potential legislative reform. We also provide transaction support for e-money businesses, including due diligence, warranties, regulatory change of control notifications and integration planning for acquisitions.
Need advice on e-money regulation?
Frequently asked questions about e-money regulation
What is electronic money under UK law?
Electronic money is defined in the EMRs 2011 regulation 2 as electronically stored monetary value that is issued on receipt of funds for the purpose of making payment transactions and is accepted as a means of payment by undertakings other than the issuer. The key features are: the money is stored electronically (not physical); it is issued in exchange for payment; and it is widely accepted beyond the issuer alone.
What is the difference between an EMI and a small EMI?
An electronic money institution (EMI) is authorised by the FCA and has no transaction limit. A small electronic money institution is registered with the FCA (not authorised) and is subject to a maximum average outstanding e-money of EUR 5 million. Small EMIs face less stringent capital and governance requirements, making registration an appropriate route for lower-volume or early-stage issuers. The choice between authorisation and registration depends on your anticipated business scale and capital position.
How does e-money regulation differ from payment services regulation?
E-money regulation under the EMRs focuses on the issuance of stored value that is redeemable and widely accepted. Payment services regulation under PSD2 and the FCA Handbook covers the provision of payment services (such as money remittance or payment processing). A firm can be both an EMI and a payment services provider, but the regulatory regimes are distinct. E-money requires redemption rights; payment services do not. Capital requirements differ between the two regimes.
What are the safeguarding requirements for e-money issuers?
The EMRs require e-money issuers to safeguard funds received in advance of electronic money issuance. The new Supplementary Regime, effective May 2026, requires daily reconciliation between e-money issued and funds held, monthly regulatory returns, annual independent audit and the appointment of a senior manager responsible for safeguarding. E-money must be held in a bank account or low-risk investments, and the issuer must maintain enough liquidity to meet redemption requests at any time.
What are the capital requirements for EMI authorisation?
EMIs must maintain own funds of at least EUR 350,000. Small EMIs (registered, not authorised) must maintain own funds equal to 2 per cent of the average outstanding e-money, subject to a minimum of EUR 25,000. These thresholds are set in euros in the EMRs 2011, reflecting their EU legislative origin. Capital must be paid-up, unencumbered and capable of absorbing losses. The FCA can impose higher capital requirements based on risk.
Can I distribute e-money through agents?
Yes, the EMRs permit e-money distribution through agents appointed in writing. However, regulatory responsibility for agent conduct cannot be outsourced. The e-money issuer remains liable for agent compliance with regulatory requirements and customer due diligence. Agents must be appropriately trained, monitored and subject to contractual controls. Many enforcement actions against e-money issuers have arisen from inadequate agent oversight.
How will the new safeguarding rules affect existing EMIs?
The Supplementary Regime introduces operational obligations that many existing EMIs are not yet ready to meet. Daily reconciliation, monthly returns and annual audit are substantially more onerous than the previous lighter-touch regime. Firms must invest in systems, banking relationships and staff to become compliant by 7 May 2026. The FCA expects firms to self-assess their readiness and has published detailed guidance on implementation.
What is the e-money redemption right?
E-money holders have the statutory right to redeem e-money at any time at par value (the amount originally paid). The issuer cannot refuse redemption or impose penalties. This creates a significant operational and liquidity obligation: the issuer must always be able to pay out in full. Redemption rights also have implications for product design, maturity, dormancy rules and any conditions on use that might limit redeemability.
Related payments regulation pages
See also our other payments regulation pages: