Product and regulatory status
Define the service, licensed activities, customer journey, custody model, legal entities and the countries where each activity is offered.
Crypto payment access depends on the exact product, licence, custody model, customer countries, fiat flow and transaction controls. OfferPSP structures those facts before assessing providers that can review the profile.
Send a private payment briefA wallet, exchange, broker, on-ramp and blockchain software company create different funds flows and underwriting requirements.
Define the service, licensed activities, customer journey, custody model, legal entities and the countries where each activity is offered.
Map card purchases, bank transfers, open-banking flows, withdrawals, settlement currencies and the point where fiat becomes a digital asset.
Customer types, KYC tiers, sanctions screening, wallet screening, source-of-funds checks, monitoring and fraud controls shape provider appetite.
Expected volume, ticket size, reserves, settlement bank, reconciliation, chargebacks, integration and backup routes determine whether a route is usable.
Provider appetite changes materially with the product and the point where fiat enters or leaves the customer journey.
Exchange, broker, wallet, on-ramp, custody and software models are separated because their payment and regulatory exposure is not interchangeable.
The brief identifies the contracting entity, customer, payment recipient, conversion point, custody role and settlement destination.
KYC tiers, sanctions screening, wallet monitoring, source-of-funds rules and manual review ownership are included in the case.
The settlement bank, currencies, reserves, withdrawals and reconciliation process must support the proposed provider route in practice.
Crypto is not one provider category. An exchange, hosted wallet, brokerage, NFT platform, mining service and software company create different licensing, custody, transaction-monitoring and funds-flow questions. The matching brief must describe the actual activity rather than rely on the word crypto.
| Review area | Evidence to include | Why providers distinguish it |
|---|---|---|
| Regulated activity | Current registrations or licences, permitted services, operating entities, customer countries and restricted jurisdictions. | The same brand may conduct regulated and unregulated activities through different entities. |
| Custody and conversion | Who controls wallets or private keys, where fiat becomes crypto, counterparties, liquidity providers and settlement accounts. | Providers need to identify each regulated hand-off and the source and destination of funds. |
| Financial-crime controls | Customer due diligence, wallet screening, Travel Rule process where applicable, transaction monitoring and escalation ownership. | A policy document alone is insufficient if the operating workflow and responsible teams are unclear. |
| Payment use case | Card purchase, bank transfer, payout, subscription or business-payment flow, including refunds, chargebacks and fiat settlement. | A provider supporting one crypto-related flow may reject another or impose different limits and evidence requirements. |
Start with the exact product and regulated perimeter, then trace one representative transaction from customer initiation to final settlement. Include wallet and fiat counterparties, customer and entity GEOs, screening controls, expected volumes, average ticket and refund logic. FATF guidance applies a risk-based approach to virtual-asset activity, but local licensing and provider appetite remain jurisdiction- and profile-specific.
Regulator, licence or registration number, authorised services, covered entity, approved domains and any territorial limitations.
Customer, merchant, exchange or liquidity partner, wallet, bank and settlement steps with ownership at every stage.
KYC tiers, sanctions and wallet screening, transaction monitoring, source-of-funds triggers and suspicious-activity escalation.
Required methods, currencies, limits, settlement, reserves, integration model, forecast and existing processing evidence.
Primary references: FATF guidance for virtual assets and VASPs. These references describe the named infrastructure or regulatory framework; they do not confirm a provider route for a particular merchant.
Specific, current information improves the quality of every provider conversation.
OfferPSP cannot guarantee a PSP for a crypto business. Provider appetite varies by product, licence, entity, customer geography and controls, so an introduction is arranged only where a credible fit exists.
Crypto businesses are not all treated the same. Exchanges, brokers, wallets, on-ramps, custody providers and blockchain software businesses have different regulatory and payment profiles.
Crypto payment matching can include both cards and bank transfers. Card collection, bank rails and withdrawals are documented as separate routes because coverage and requirements differ.
OfferPSP does not work with anonymous or sanctions-avoidance services. Matching requires a lawful model, transparent ownership, customer due diligence, sanctions controls and source-of-funds procedures.
Share the company, target GEOs, vertical, methods, volume and current constraint. We will assess the next useful step without publishing your provider search.