Thursday, November 1, 2012
"With liability shift timelines in place, financial institutions may feel compelled to implement EMV immediately," wrote co-authors TMG Director of Client Relations Matt Flynn and Brandon Kuehl, TMG Product Development Architect. "However, it's important to understand these timelines are not mandated."
The paper noted that during previous liability shifts, between 30 and 60 percent of merchants and issuers updated their technology in time to meet network deadlines. The authors suggested a pragmatic approach to EMV, urging FIs to prepare a thorough cost-benefit analysis when considering system upgrades that are EMV compliant.
Once EMV is determined to be the right path, format selection is the next concern to address. Visa reportedly prefers chip-and-signature, while MasterCard prefers chip-and-PIN. The authors suggest hybridization of formats as a possibility, stating, "Today, a given plastic can have both chip-and-signature and chip-and-PIN functionality. In this setup, the card's chip communicates with the merchant's terminal to determine which verification method to use."
One final option offered by the authors is that issuers who choose to migrate to chip-and-signature cards now can add chip-and-PIN functionality later. However, the authors pointed out that chip-and-PIN technology does not allow merchants to designate routing of PIN transactions, which conflicts with the Durbin Amendment to the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act and could exclude debit issuers from the EMV equation. To download the free white paper, visit themembersgroup.com/premvroadmap.
The Green Sheet Inc. is now a proud affiliate of Bankcard Life, a premier community that provides industry-leading training and resources for payment professionals. Click here for more information.
Notice to readers: These are archived articles. Contact names or information may be out of date. We regret any inconvenience.
