ThrowAwayIRUK

Then, your "universal sentence" is not matching, since you didn't mention the transfer way:

for sure i can charge you more for a SWIFT or T2 EU-transaction than i do for a SEPA EU-transaction.

>> ..In most countries, payments within the same bank have been instant (and free).. <<

Which is quite simple: First, its internaly only an exchange of liabilites in your balanace sheet.

Second, it does not involve any outgoing gateways/interfaces.

Third, if you are using a SaaS-corebanking-solution, those types of transactions are usually excluded in your contract.

From that perspective, it is absolutely useful.

SEPA SDD Core has one big advantage for (trustworthy) customers of a merchant:

it's fucking cheap for the merchant :-)

and with cheap, i mean, reeeeeaaalllyyyy cheap (well, depending on your PSP/etc.)

for a bank, the "purchasing costs" per one SEPA SDD at your central bank is in the fractions of the fractions of a cent. (you can check the rates on your local central bank website)

Interesting!

So, TIPS is just one of the available clearing mechanisms available for the SEPA Inst scheme. (The other one is RT1, which is live a little bit longer)

Currently, there is no "regulatory forced" interoperability between RT1 and TIPS, though the 4CB are discussing it. (Esp. since RT1 is a private clearing mechanism, while TIPS is the one operated by the 4CB)

And, regarding fee: You are wrong - depending on the local jurisdiction (esp. consumer rights), a bank may for sure charge for processing SEPA SCT Instant messages. Over here, SEPA Instant transactions are around 0,50EUR - 1,00EUR, currently; some are also offering them for free.

DISCLAIMER: Lead Payment Engineer at an European Challenger Bank, i'm implementing that stuff in the backend, i'm mainly talking to our central bank.

SEPA has 4 message types, currently:

- PUSH: - SCT Standard - SCT Instant

- PULL: - SDD Core - SDD B2B

As a bank, you are not forced to support all of them; also, it depends on the local consumer behaviour: in some countries, pull mechanisms are not that widely accepted

DISCLAIMER: Lead Payment Engineer at an European Challenger Bank, i'm implementing that stuff in the backend, i'm mainly talking to our central bank.

Actually, in the first case, its not instantly take, instead it is marked as a "abgesicherte laschrift", which is equivalent to enter card+PIN, meaning you can't revoke those. Though, sure you can, but it will end up with nice discussions with your bank :)

Depends on which card you have used and which scheme was used to process;

In general, "double scheme cards" (MC + Maestro on one card) should offer you the option to choose, while at the POS, which scheme should be used; the thing is, the merchant is not required to offer you this question, and there is a "default scheme" on such cards. This means, in cases the merchant does not ask you, the default scheme is chosen, which is usually the one that brings in more fees for the bank/PSP.

And: Depending on the contract between you and your bank, it maybe that you couldn't revoke the "lastschrift", yes.

Not exactly:

You could sign a contract with your landlord, then revoke the so called "SEPA mandate" afterwards and you can forcibly switch to "manual payment" each month, since the SEPA mandate is not necessarily required or a "legally-necessary intrinsic component of the contract" (check for example: https://deutschesmietrecht.de/mietvertrag/662-mietzahlung-ei... )

Tough, depends on which type of relation you want to have to your landlord ;-)

Not correct:

Giropay does in fact include fees, though these are usually covered by the seller. (check for example: https://www.unternehmerportal.info/giropay/)

DISCLAIMER: Lead Payment Engineer at an European Challenger Bank, i'm implementing that stuff in the backend, i'm mainly talking to our central bank.

Not correct:

SEPA SDD Core + SDD B2B are working crossborder; though you're right that these are not deployed regularly/seldom.

DISCLAIMER: Lead Payment Engineer at an European Challenger Bank, i'm implementing that stuff in the backend, i'm mainly talking to our central bank.

Not really:

SEPA has several message types:

- SCT Standard is a push - SCT Inst is a push - SDD Core is a pull - SDD B2B is a pull

Leading Payment Engineer of one the most aggressive challenger banks in EU here:

- first, SEPA has several message types

- SEPA SCT: A standard transfer, usually settled the next day - SEPA SCT Inst: a realtime transfer, to be settled within 10 seconds max (check rulebook on ECB website) - SEPA SDD Core: Direct debit, this can be used to pay your utility bills e.g.; though you can revert this one up to a couple of month - SEPA SDD B2B: Direct debit for businesses, this one can't be reverted as you gave an explicitly signed permission to execute those (this one is used between businesses)

So, my idea here would be that COINBASE is supporting/using a partnerbank/PSP which allows SEPA SCT Instant.

Regarding fraud: - if one gets aware of your IBAN, the other party can try to pull an SDD, thats right. But: you can claim this one at your bank and you will be refunded immediately. (with SEPA SDD B2B, this wouldn't be possible as you would have a signed a permission) Though, unless a fraudster is counterfeiting your signature, no one will pull a SEPA SDD B2B. But, sure: Check your accounts regulary.

- regarding SEPA SCT Instant: To execute such transaction, you need to verify it by 2FA. If you give permission on your 2FA device, the money is send out.

- what if you do a typo with SEPA SCT Instant or if someone get somehow around your 2FA? In this case, you could reach out to the other bank with a so called R-Transaction, though if a fraudster is aware of all this, i'm pretty sure the person is capable of managing the rest of the track to pull the money out by doing additional subsequent transfers to other banks

P.S.: As far as i can see, Coinbase is not running through us, you may check your bank statement to see which way the money went ;-)