Onboarding & KYB for new crypto payment channels – dealing with regional variations

asked by u/marco_w · 3d · 2 answers

Running into some headaches onboarding new crypto payment processors for a client. The general sentiment is that KYB is getting tighter across the board, which is understandable. However, the inconsistency in requirements, especially for smaller market cap tokens or certain regions, is creating significant bottlenecks. One processor might accept a simple utility bill, another wants bank statements translated and notarized for the exact same entity.

This isn't just about initial setup; ongoing compliance checks also seem to vary wildly. It's becoming a full-time job just managing the documentation requests, let alone negotiating fee structures ($BTC / $USDT settlement). Are others seeing this level of friction? Any best practices for streamlining the KYB process when expanding crypto payment options globally without dedicating an entire legal team to each new integration?

Join the full discussion

Top answers

  • u/james.moreau· 1 pts· 3d

    Definitely seeing that too. It feels like some regions or smaller tokens are in a grey area, leading to processors taking overly cautious stances, which then impacts onboarding speed and cost.

  • u/milos_horvat· 1 pts· 2d

    I've seen this firsthand. It feels like a patchwork of regulations sometimes, and trying to align multiple processors to the lowest common denominator of KYB can be a real drag on efficiency. Do you find certain regions are more problematic than others, or is it fairly universal?

Related questions