Updated CESOP Q&A: here’s what you need to know
The European Commission’s Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union (DG TAXUD) just released, on July 27th, a new version of the CESOP Q&A. We have listed some of the most important changes below.
First things first, it is important to note that no new questions have been added to the Q&As.
In question 3.1.2, further clarifications are provided on the identifiers to be used (IBAN, BIC, others) to determine the location of the payee/payer. For instance, PSP might use different location identifiers depending on the payment products it offers!
Here are the other relevant points to note:
- The Reference Documents table has been discarded.
- Question 2.1.1.1 (Entities in scope / Territorial scope for third territories): the third bullet clarifying obligation of PSPs in third territories not listed in Article 6 of the VAT Directive has been erased.
- Question 2.1.1.1 (Entities in scope / Territorial scope for third territories): clarification provided on PSP reporting obligations for payments to payees located in third territories listed in Article 6 of the VAT Directive, from payers located in Member states other than third territories mainland.
- Question 2.1.1.1 (Entities in scope / Territorial scope for third territories): the table giving an overview of which PSP shall report in the different payments to and from third territories of Member States has been erased.
- Question 2.1.1.4 (Entities in scope / Payee’s PSP in EEA country): question is rescoped to EEA countries instead of ETFA countries.
- Question 2.2.5 (Payments and PSPs in scope): clarification provided on PSPs reporting obligations when the payer and the payee are the same person holding different payment accounts; always use the location identifiers that best represent the locations to determine if it is a cross-border payments.
- Question 2.3.2(Card Payments): figures in the Example have been corrected since they were wrong in the version 1 of the document.
- Question 2.4 (Electronic Money): clarification provided on PSPs reporting obligations related to funding of an e-wallet via bank-transfer and pay-out from an e-wallet via a bank transfer.
- Question 3.2.3 (Threshold of 25 payments / data elements to take into account to aggregate payment information related to the same payee): aggregating is expected to be a best-effort obligation for PSPs. In case of uncertainty, do not proceed with the aggregation.
- Question 4.8 (Reporting / branch reporting): second paragraph removed.
- Question 4.10 (Reporting / branch/subsidiary reporting): a fourth example (e-money provider acting both as payer and payee) has been added.
- Question 4.13 (Reporting / PSP is acting on behalf of both the payer and the payee): answer slightly modified.
- Question 4.16 (Reporting / Payee’s PSP in EEA country): question is rescoped to EEA countries instead of EFTA countries. This question is actually a duplicate of Question 2.1.1.4.
- Question 5.5 (Data Elements / nil reporting): according to Article 243b(4)(b) of the directive, nil reporting cannot be mandatory but can be allowed on a voluntary basis. PSPs should refer to their national authorities.
- Question 5.9 (Data Elements / record corrections when, in the meantime, payee name has changed): the PSP can correct (instead of should in v1).
- Question 6.1 (Data Elements / file size): watch out that some member states have lower limitations than (1 GB). In such a case PSP will have to split the submission in smaller parts.
What are the next steps?
On September 15, 2023, and with the aim to discuss the Q&As, a workshop with representatives from the industry of Payment Service Providers and Member States will be organized.
The latest version is still considered as a ‘living’ document and subject to modifications until late 2023 when the latest version will be translated in the official working languages of the EU Institutions.
The full version of the Q&A document is available HERE.
Looking for a solution to help your institution in its CESOP compliance journey?