• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제10권1호
• /
• pp.139-154
• /
• 2008

This research want to discuss some issues about payment system of America. This research focuses on comparing ACH with Fedwire. Firstly Fedwire is the payment system for only large-dollar transfer(Large-Value Transfer System; LVTS), while ACH(Automated Clearing House)payment mainly applies a consumer account. Secondly ACH transaction is either credit or debit transfer, while Fedwire is only credit transfer. Thirdly the communication system of Fedwire has twoway method, telephonelike communication network, but ACH is oneway store and forward electronic mail. At present LVTS divides into RTGS(Real-Time Gross Settlement) and DNS(Deferred Net Settlement). However Fedwire uses either RTGS(instantaneous for every transaction) or DNS(net net transaction) but ACH uses only DNS(net net transaction). Fourthly ACH is substantially cheaper than the Fedwire payment. lastly security is important in both Fedwire and ACH, it is even more crucial in Fedwire In addition, for each transaction, Fedwire may entail individual instantaneous confirmation to the originator and notification to the receiver, whereas ACH do not.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제8권4호
• /
• pp.71-88
• /
• 2006

This article want to discuss on comparative research between CHIPS and Fedwire as the cross-border payment systems which America have and use at present. CHIPS is a New York-based automated private-sector clearing facility for large-dollar transfers. It is a central switch communication and settlement system whose 53 participating banks exchange same-day payment messages over dedicated communication lines linking each one to the CHIPS central computer. On January 22, 2001, CHIPS introduced immediate finality for payment released from the CHIPS queue. Unlike the Fedwire system, The CHIPS system is not a real-time gross settlement system. Instead, CHIPS is hybrid system that uses a computer program to select payment order in a queue for release to the receiving bank. CHIPS are governed by CHIPS Rules and Administrative Procedures. Fedwire system is a nationwide electronic fund-transfer system facilitating same-day transfers throughout the United States. It is a gross settlement system providing immediate credit to the receiving bank's master account. Communicating between a Federal Reserve Bank and Fedwire users can be either on-line or off-line. Fedwire transfers are governed by Subpart B of Regulation J, issued by the Federal Reserve Board, which incorporates U.C.C. Article 4A but preempts or supersedes any of its inconsistent provisions.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제19권1호
• /
• pp.43-63
• /
• 2017

본 논문은 거액지급결제시스템인 캐나다의 LVTS와 미국의 Fedwire를 비교하여 연구하였다. 왜냐하면 양국은 국제결제은행(BIS) 지급결제제도위원회(CPSS)에 참가하고 있는 주요 14개국 중 동일한 북미경제권이며, LVTS와 Fedwire는 양국을 대표하는 거액지급결제시스템이기 때문이다. 연구의 결과, 양국의 시스템은 지급시스템의 제도적 기반과 지배구조, 참가방법, 지급지시의 착오, 위험관리정책 및 지급의 최종성과 효과가 다르다는 결론에 도달하였다. 또한 양 지급시스템의 연구를 통하여 한국의 지급결제시스템이 참여자들에게 인정받으면서 더욱 보편적인 시스템으로 발전하기 위한 정책적 시사점으로 다음과 같은 점을 제시하였다. 첫째, 소액과 거액이체시스템을 분리운영하고 있는 미국 및 캐나다와 다르게 한국은 통합시스템을 운영해왔다. 비록 연계결제망의 구축으로 10억원이상의 거액자금도 1회이체가 가능하게 되었으나 이를 통제할 수 있는 제도적 장치, 즉, 자금이체 주체별 및 금액별로 분리하여 참가자를 규율하는 것이 바람직하다. 둘째, 미국이나 캐나다에서 규정하고 있는 착오에 관한 명확한 정의 및 유형에 관하 규정이 한국의 제도에서는 명확한 명시가 없다. 참가자를 안정적으로 규율하기 위해서는 이를 별도로 규정할 필요가 있다. 마지막으로 이체규모에 제한이 사라진 만큼 참가기관에게 지급시스템 운영 기술력 확보, 적절한 비상시에 대비 백업자원 및 엄격한 보안 및 기술 요구조건 등을 추가하여 참가요건을 더욱 엄격히 요구할 필요가 있다.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제44권3호
• /
• pp.191-202
• /
• 2019

Despite innovative efforts to accommodate changes in the payment environment, the new types of settlement risks that are emerging require preemptive and proactive responses. Therefore, Korea should complement and develop large-value funds payment system operation and risk management policies by introducing international standards and linking with advanced financial institutions. This study examines the major issues such as the development process and characteristics of the large-value funds payment system of the two countries, the operation policy of the central bank, and the risk management policy by comparing the US Fedwire with the Korea Bok-Wire+. In addition, policy implications are suggested for efficient operation and development of Bok-Wire+.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제15권
• /
• pp.59-87
• /
• 2001

In recent years electronic fund transfers covered by the Electronic Fund Transfer Act 1978 for consumer protection and the Article 4A of Uniform Commercial Code(U.C.C.) 1989 for wholesale electronic payments in United States. Electronic fund transfers carried out by use of a wire transfer network, automated clearing house, or other communication system of a clearing house or other association of banks such as direct deposit, Fedwire, automated teller machine, point-of-sale, and credit card transactions have been increasingly common in consumer transactions and wholesale transactions. Especially, the Article 4A of U.C.C. governs the rights and obligations associated with transactions such as an issue and acceptance of payment order, execution of sender's payment order by receiving bank, and payment. These legal frameworks in connection with electronic fund transfers in United States can play a leading role in establishing model not only within the United States, but also as a basis for developments of electronic commerce law in Korea including other countries.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제9권2호
• /
• pp.123-140
• /
• 2007

This paper wants to suggest some issues on the acceptance of payment order in Electronic Funds Transfer of USA. The result can be summarized as fellows; First, originator's bank accepts a payment order when it executes the order. Secondly, beneficiary's bank accepts a payment order at the earliest of the following times: (1) when the bank pays the beneficiary as stated in Section 4A-405(a) or 4A-405(b), (2) when the bank notifies the beneficiary of receipt of the order or that the account of the beneficiary has been credited with respect to the order unless the notice indicates that the bank is rejecting the order or that funds with respect to the order may not be withdrawn or used until receipt of payment from of the order. (3) when the bank receives payment of the entire amount of the sender's order pursuant to Section 4A-403(a)(1) or 4A-403(a)(2). Lastly, the acceptance of a payment order cannot occur before the order is received by the receiving bank.