With the popularity of Zoom during the coronavirus pandemic, it was just a matter of time till this service was in some way monetised on the user end. With cases on the rise and people looking for alternatives that limit the disruption of business, Safaricom’s M-Pesa seems to have struck on a solution for businesses and individuals to maximise their services.

In a report by Gadgets Africa, Webipesa allows individuals and organizations to charge a registration fee for Zoom meetings. Instead of users going through M-Pesa to make a payment and then the both parties having to confirm payment. A client will be directed to M-Pesa to complete the payment.

Upon completion of the payment, the attendee will receive information about the meeting as well as a link. To avoid any fraud or misconduct Webipesa creates a unique link for every registration. This link can only be used by the single attendee.

The requirements for this are as follows:

• The user must have a Zoom Pro Account
• There is no set up fee
• However, Webipesa charges a 10% usage fee for each transaction

The applications for this are far ranging and include, classes, tutorials, coaching, doctor’s consultations, and more.

Webipesa say that funds deposited for this service go straight to the individual or organisation’s Webipesa wallet. They can withdraw these funds within 24 hours.

All in all a pretty interesting approach. Integrating this service into Webipesa improves the efficiency of the whole transaction.

This will surely make it easier for businesses, professionals, and individuals that conduct business through consultations, as well as minimize disruption.

The post Monetising Zoom calls through M-Pesa [Kenya] appeared first on Techzim.

The court documentation filed by Econet as part of their Urgent Chamber Application to temporarily suspend the Magistrate Court’s decision to issue a Search and Seizure warranty to the ZRP makes for interesting reading.

Econet Wireless’ Chief Executive Officer, Douglas Mboweni has a written statement that is part of the Urgent Chamber application and in that statement the CEO argues that the state is using its powers to interfere with the rights of subscribers;

There can be no doubt that individuals and the society suffer at the hands of criminals. But there can also be no doubt that in the absence of a system of limits which limits state power by protecting substantive rights like the rights to privacy and the rights to dignity, individuals and society will suffer at the hands of the state and its officials.

The issuance of warrants of search and seizure is one of the tools that has been used by the state and its officials to unlawfully interfere with the rights to privacy and rights to dignity.

The Econet CEO also described the facts relied upon by the 2nd respondent (Mkhululi Nyoni – Head of CID Asset Forfeiture Unit) as “ridiculous” and not enough to justify the Magistrate Court’s decision to issue a search warrant. Mboweni says this is the case because;

1. Mboweni says contrary to Mkhululi Nyoni’s assertions Econet doesn’t have subsidiaries;
2. Mboweni notes that Econet “doesn’t have a category of customers/subscribers known as merchants; billers and agents”. Mboweni says Nyoni noted these as Econet customers when in fact they are relevant to EcoCash operations. Mboweni says this shows that Nyoni copied allegations laid against Econet by government officials a few weeks ago;
3. Econet’s CEO argues that all of their subscribers are “verifiable and auditable” and the company shares this information with the regulator POTRAZ;
4. Lastly, Mboweni also said the Econet network doesn’t have the capacity to credit any money to its subscribers. He argues Econet can only credit airtime to subscribers and that this airtime can’t be converted into any sum of money.

The above points are made on the basis that Nyoni gave the following statement when requesting the Search and Seizure Warrant;

I have reasonable grounds to suspect that Econet Wireless (Pvt) Ltd is involved in Money laundering activities in violation of section 8(1) (a) (b) ARW section 8(6) of the Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Act (Chapter 9:24). 3. On 9 July 2020, information was received to the effect that during the period extending from 011anuary 2020 to 30 June 2020, ECONET WIRELESS (Pvt) Ltd and as subsidiaries have been fraudulently creating and issuing non-attributable and non-auditable individual subscribers merchants billers and agent which they credited with huge sums of money and distributed to thee runners through their trust accounts. The runners would in turn buy foreign currency from the black before being externalized.

Mboweni goes as far as saying that Nyoni “did not apply his mind in coming to the suspicion that Econet is involved in the alleged crime.”

Lastly, the CEO also argues that the search and seizure warrant isn’t speficic enough in the following regards;

1. It doesn’t specify the premises to be searched and yet Econet has “a number of premises from where it operates throughout the country.”;
2. The search warranty doesn’t identify which police officer should execute it’;
3. Mboweni argues that if the magistrate had applied his mind he wouldn’t have authorised the warrant “which does not point to the commission of the alleged crime in any way”.

The post Econet CEO – Issuance of search warrants one of the tools used by state to interfere with rights appeared first on Techzim.

Being a young Zimbabwean who holds no faith in our banking system – mobile money has been a big part of my life. Around 49% of Zimbabweans are registered with a mobile money service. 1 in 2 Zimbos is a significant number and this got me wondering – Is the story the same in other countries in our region?

We looked at 8 Southern African countries, taking into consideration the number of mobile money users, mobile money users as a percentage of the population, transactions processed and the agent networks.

Compiling the data

Whilst there is no explanation by data aggregators such as GSMA as to why some providers don’t provide the data for their most recent mobile money report – I assume it’s because the data isn’t widely reported (or valued) in certain countries. The biggest offenders in this regard for me are South Africa and Namibia.

Some of the data deficiencies seem to be a result of the fact that regulation of mobile money usually works as follows. Initially, the regulation is done by whoever regulates mobile networks and they don’t seem to compile all the data with fields such as agents and transactions processed getting left out.

At a later date, the regulation of mobile money is then taken over by the Central Banks who layout regulatory frameworks but at times still don’t share statistics.

Regardless, we will compare the data at hand and make some conclusions based on that.

Lay of the land…

• Of the 8 countries, half have a larger mobile money user base compared to those with bank accounts. Of those Zimbabwe has the largest disparity (21% more mobile money users than there are banked people) which explains why mobile money is so intrinsic to us.
• On the opposite end of the spectrum is South Africa, where mobile money initially failed to take off between 2012 and 16′. MTN relaunched their mobile money service this year and the jury is still out regarding whether it will actually be a success. The argument in South Africa has been that their payments and banking system are evolved to the point of making mobile money redundant and at the time of writing that has proved to be true.
• Mozambique seems to be striking a happy medium with 1 in every 5 people having a mobile money account and 1 in 3 having a bank account. A large portion of the Mozambican population seems to be underserved by both banks and mobile money. Given that there are said to be 14 million mobile subscribers suggests that mobile money could end up being equal or overtaking the banking sector in that country.
• In a country like Namibia where 77% of the population is banked, it’s hard to see where or how mobile money becomes as essential. They already have a great banking system and with banks on the continent trying to close the gap in functionality between themselves, mobile money and fintech’s it’s hard to imagine mobile money becoming more significant in that context.

The agent story

5 of the countries above report on agent numbers and thus the table below attempts to establish how widespread the agent networks in these countries are;

• The number of agents per user in Lesotho and Zimbabwe are pretty similar and I believe this boils down to the fact that EcoCash is present in both countries and thus they are using an agent model that is most likely identical. Knowing what we know about the agent story in Zim – most of these people were actually earning most of their money based off commissions they make when mobile money users cash-in and cash-out.

Agents have two primary functions at the moment i.e onboarding new subscribers and facilitating Cash-in/Cash-out transactions.

For agents earning a significant chunk of their money from agent activities they could face a problem going forward – their earning capacity diminishes if and when i) mobile money user growth becomes stagnant resulting in fewer people to onboard and ii)Interoperability (which benefits the consumer) threatens the agents commissions directly – as interoperability at the subscriber level could lead to less cash-in/cash-out with subscribers sending funds directly to one another.

Transactions

When it comes to transactions processed, the data is even thinner than the rest of the fields we’ve looked at but there’s no harm in gleaning on the crumbs we have at our disposal;

The most interesting thing from the above table was simply the fact that despite having a comparable number of mobile money users between Zim and Mozambique – Zimbabweans were transacting nearly 5 times more than Mozambicans on mobile money. This is reflective of the fact that mobile money in Mozambique is used more to send and receive money than it actually is used to transact. In Zimbabwe, because of cash shortages, cashing out and using the funds off-platform has become harder and thus subscribers are forced to transact electronically.

Looking ahead…

Whilst, I previously mentioned that banks in the region and the world over are trying to become more flexible and offer services offered by mobile money and fintechs which will probably chip away at the growth a bit. The advantage that mobile money has over banks though that their solutions don’t need the deployment of hardware in the nature that many banking solutions do.

If I had to make a prediction, I don’t think growth will be as rapid as it was in the last decade and one of the main reasons for that is simply that regulatory scrutiny has increased since the banking industry cried that the lax regulation of mobile money accelerated scale

The post State of mobile money in Southern Africa appeared first on Techzim.

Cassava Smartech announced that they have delayed the release of their audited financial statements for fiscal year-end February 2020. They made this announcement to shareholders citing that the delay is being caused by the “regulatory review” of one of the company’s key holdings EcoCash.

The previously mentioned regulatory review is a currency manipulation investigation being conducted by the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe.

To revisit or, catch up on the events that have taken place surrounding EcoCash, what follows are the reasons why Cassava’s financial report has been delayed:

RBZ directs EcoCash to freeze agent accounts holding more than ZWL$100 000.00

This was a head scratching directive from the RBZ and their affiliate FIU. EcoCash and their parent company were not consulted about this, this move went on to make financial transactions not only difficult for EcoCash, businesses that rely on their services but also for individuals who no longer had access to agents. EcoCash serves the majority of Zimbabweans and this directive showed that the impact to the transacting public wasn’t weighed when the decision was made.

The pretext to all of this was that EcoCash was facilitating irregular activities (currency manipulation), which were causing the sharp decline of the local currency.

EcoCash CEO charged under anti-money laundering law

EcoCash were expected to comply and freeze agent accounts. They didn’t and went to the high court to seek a reversal of the directive. This wasn’t taken well by the authorities, and they moved to charge EcoCash, Cassava, and their leadership (EcoCash CEO Natalie Jabangwe and Director Eddie Chibi) under section 5 of the Money Laundering and Proceeds Crime Act.

The charges laid out against EcoCash were as follows:

• Failure to comply with any mandatory requirement of a circular, directive or guideline issued in terms of the Act (Item 26 of Table of Civil Infringements, AML/CFT Directive No. 2 of 2014)
• Failure to comply with any obligation relating to customer identification and /or verification (Item 2 of Table of Civil Infringements, AML/CFT Directive No. 2 of 2014
• Failure to maintain books and records as required under section 24 of the Act (Item 2 of Table of Civil Infringements, AML/CFT Directive No. 2 of 20141
• Failure to timely avail to the FIU, upon request, books and records referred to in section 24 of the Act or any information contained therein (Item 14 of Table of Civil Infringements, AML/CFT Directive No. 2 of 20141
• Failure to report a suspicious transaction as required in terms of section 30 of the Act: (Item 21 of Table of Civil Infringements, AML/CFT Directive No. 2 of 2014)
• Disclosing to a customer or to a third party that a suspicious transaction report has been, is being, or will be submitted to the Unit: (Item 24 of Table of Civil Infringements, AM L/CFT Directive No. 2 of 2014)

There is an article that we published at the time, that broke down all the charges and link to that can be found here

The mobile money ban

More of a side note to all of this, but nonetheless important. I’m sure we all remember that Friday night when Nick Magwana tweeted the statement that banned all forms of mobile money. Thankfully that sort of far-reaching measure (due mostly to public outcry) didn’t come in the form it was first announced.

The RBZ published a more toned down version of that initial statement. Not banning mobile money but forcing everyone who trades on it to liquidate through the banking system.

Again demonstrating that they weren’t thinking of what the millions of Zimbabweans would do if EcoCash was no longer operational. It was more important to have their way than it was to assess the nation’s dependency on EcoCash, and maybe finding another way.

Econet and Cassava offices searched by the police to get evidence of money laundering

Making EcoCash the scapegoat for the declining local currency has been a full time job for the financial authorities. A few weeks ago there was a search and seizure warrant that was tweeted by Jonathan Moyo which alerted everyone to what was happening. This court issued warrant gave law enforcement grounds to sift through customer information. Beyond the breach on Econet and Cassava, this is doubly worrying because the warrant put information of the majority of the public in the hands of law enforcement.

The following may not be closely related to the above, but it would be remiss of me not to mention the RBZ directive that declared ZIMSWITCH the National Switch for all transactions. This essentially puts EcoCash on the same playing field as all the other mobile money operators. At the moment it seems like the Authorities may have found a way to neutralise Econet and EcoCash. It’s also worth mentioning that the date for directive to take effect is fast approaching (15 August 2020).

In the statement published by Cassava Smartech they concluded by saying that any publication or updates will be made on, or before the 30th of September 2020.

The post EcoCash “currency manipulation” probe delays Cassava Smartech financial report appeared first on Techzim.

EcoCash has reviewed its pricing structure for their mobile money services. The new charges are as follows :

It looks as though many people had not noticed the increase in tariffs. That being said they didn’t really publish this, it may have been something they published in the newspapers, and we hadn’t yet noticed.

The post EcoCash has increased tariffs appeared first on Techzim.

At first glance this looked rather interesting. A service that allowed CABS account holders to send money to any mobile money number. That initial excitement faded though as I went deeper into CABS’ new service Send-to-Cell.

How does it work?

As mentioned before CABS customer can send money to any mobile money number regardless of whether the user has a CABS account or not. CABS customers can access this through the bank’s USSD code (*227#).

The first catch is that the recipient of the money has to create a CABS Textacash account in order to use the money. Recipients can also do this through CABS’ USSD code.

The second catch, the sender will incur a 3% service charge for sums over ZWL$100.00 on top of the Intermediary Money Transfer Tax (2% Tax).

Who is going to use this?

I am struggling to understand who this service was designed for. I can’t see what convenience this brings to CABS customers. A total of 5% in charges for a transaction as low as ZWL$100.00 doesn’t strike me as something that many people will line up to use

If we compare this to EcoCash going by their recent service charge increase, the 2% Tax kicks in for transactions ZWL$300.00 and above. That threshold makes charges for sums underneath ZWL$300.00 tolerable. Speaking of EcoCash, you’d be hard-pressed to find someone who regularly transacts who doesn’t have an EcoCash wallet.

On the non-Textacash customer side of things, it would be simpler just to get the money over EcoCash or bank transfer. There is no caveat too that would draw non-CABS customer to register for Textacash.

The post CABS launches a service to send money to any number, here’s why it won’t work appeared first on Techzim.

One Money has reviewed service fees. The new prices are as follows:

Transaction Tariffs

Debit Card & ZIPIT

Information Services

The post OneMoney has reviewed service fees appeared first on Techzim.

The ladies and gentlemen over at FBC must either have an ear to the ground or they had this one in the pipeline. A couple of days ago we reported that FBC was making facilities available for Civil Servants to liquidate their US$75 allowance over WhatsApp and email. As progressive as those moves are they are not very inclusive because of the way data prices are.

FBC in a tweet announced that they will be offering Civil Servants a facility to liquidate their allowance over FBC’s USSD platform.

This goes a long way to making this process a lot easier for the men and women of the Civil Service who are FBC customers. Their work is already difficult especially with a good number of them on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic. More Banks should put this service into place.

The post FBC was listening, as Civil Servants can now convert USD allowance via USSD appeared first on Techzim.

On the 9th of July, the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe issued a directive that made ZimSwitch the national payments switch. This meant that EcoCash was going to be relegated to being just another wallet. ZimSwitch as the national switch for Mobile Money means that one can essentially send money from EcoCash to OneMoney or Telecash or any bank account even one that is not linked to one’s EcoCash wallet (and vice versa). Well, that deadline for everyone to connect to the national switch was the 15th of August 2020.

The 15th of August was an ambitious date to set for integration on this scale. These are incredibly complex parties to bring under one umbrella. It wasn’t feasible for several platforms on different systems to be able to intergrate that quickly. We spoke to some source at EcoCash and they said that they hadn’t met the deadline and to our understanding, the other mobile money operators haven’t as well.

On that note

There was an article by Cash Talk where they attempted to see if the National Switch was in effect. The transaction they demonstrated (Sending money from EcoCash to NetOne) is something that has always been there. We reported on this in May, sending money from EcoCash to NetOne at present is the same as sending money from an EcoCash wallet to an unregistered number even an unregistered Econet number. This is not wallet to wallet interoperability.

The only way to get the money, in this case (when sent to a NetOne number from EcoCash), is to go to an Agent to cash out. The problem is that there are no agents operational to facilitate a cash-out.

The money that is sent like this will be stuck in limbo and may reverse if left unclaimed. It’s a surprise that EcoCash and other mobile money providers still have this transaction in place. Without anyone to facilitate a cash-out then there really is no point to this.

It is not clear when EcoCash, will be intergrated with ZimSwitch nor when all players will have real wallet to wallet interoperability. OneMoney and Telecash are already on Zimswitch somewhat but not to the scale demanded by the central bank now.

The post No, you can’t send money from EcoCash to OneMoney yet appeared first on Techzim.

The Monetary Policy Statement (MPS) is out and as we expect, the RBZ has announced some surprise regulations. The war against mobile money is far from over it appears…

What’s the new rule?

Under the section titled “measures to address mobile banking deficiencies” is a set of new regulations. Mobile money operators “shall with immediate effect close all multiple wallets and allow just one wallet per individual.” Yes, you read that right! If you have multiple accounts on EcoCash, that won’t be the case for long.

A lot is unclear…

As is always the case with these “immediate-effect-regulations” that RBZ has been issuing throughout the year a lot isn’t clear;

• The MPS doesn’t explain how this will be done. Will people with multiple mobile wallets from one provider be the only ones affected? If someone has one Telecash, EcoCash and OneMoney wallet are they safe or they too will have those closed?
• The RBZ doesn’t explain what will happen to money in the accounts being closed;
• In the event that an individual has multiple wallets, it’s not clear how mobile money operators determine which account to close.

Why limit mobile money wallets?

Limiting individuals to a single account has been done to counter agents who were using multiple lines;

Following the suspension and freezing of agent and bulk-payer wallets on 27 June 2020, mobile money operators have allowed illegal foreign currency dealers to use multiple individual wallets as a means to bypass the transaction limits and continue with their illicit transactions.

The post RBZ announces mobile money rule: Individuals can’t have more than one wallet anymore appeared first on Techzim.

Earlier today, the RBZ published the Monetary Policy Statement and there are a number of pretty shocking declarations. One of which is that agents lines are officially a thing of the past.

The same document also outlines that mobile money wallets will now be limited to one per individual.

RIP agents (2011-2020)

Agents have been a huge part of Zimbos life for the last decade. The RBZ suggest that they are out of our lives for good;

Agent wallets are no longer serving any legitimate purpose and were now being used primarily for illegal foreign exchange transactions. Agents’ mobile money wallets are therefore abolished, with immediate effect.

Monetary Policy Statement 2020

The central bank claims agents with funds in suspended/frozen accounts will be allowed to move the money to their bank accounts. But even that comes with a big asterisk since the funds will be moved on one condition. The Financial Intelligence Unit will first “determine the legitimacy of the source of funds.”

How many people will be affected?

In 2019, there were 59 219 agents. It is widely believed around 50 000 of those were EcoCash agents so that will be the most widely affected service provider. To be fair when you consider that agents had multiple agent lines the actual number of agents might be lower than 50 000.

Impact

It will be interesting to see the impact of this ban. In rural areas, agents had become the only source of cash since there are no banks and the RBZs overnight bans mean accessing cash in these areas will become harder.

In both rural and urban areas, agents were charging a premium for cashing-out (withdrawals). This will probably get worse since the agents (or people still assuming this role) now use normal lines that have a daily limits of ZW$5000.

On the flip side, this could mean people transition to digital money as cash becomes harder to obtain.

The post Agent lines banned by RBZ as “they no longer serve any legitimate purpose” appeared first on Techzim.

Zimbabwe’s Central Bank (aka RBZ) has been on a war path with mobile money services (mainly EcoCash) for most of the year. RBZ firmly believes EcoCash and other mobile money services have led to the currency instability in Zimbabwe.

After some court battles and tightening of mobile money regulations, mobile money in Zimbabwe looks much different than it did a year ago.

RBZ vs Mobile Money

In the Monetary Policy Statement (MPS), the RBZ has detailed some of the faults of mobile money services. There are new allegations included in the list of faults presented below:

• Non-adherence to KYC principles, characterised by creation of mobile money accounts using fictitious and unverified identification particulars;
• Creation of money on the platforms (overdrafts and fraudulent/fictitious credits) which is not backed by balances in the Mobile Money Trust Accounts;
• System infrastructure inadequacies and weak Anti Money Laundering controls;
• Failure to comply with, including willful disregard for, regulatory directives;
• Connivance between mobile money operator employees and customers to delay or illegally bypass account freeze orders;
• Failure to deduct or remit statutory taxes; and
• Rampant abuse of agent, super-agent and bulk payment wallets for purposes of trading on the foreign exchange parallel market.

As a result of all of the above the RBZ today announced two shock moves;

1. Agent lines banned permanently. RBZ says agent lines “no longer serve any purpose”;
2. Individuals no longer allowed to have more than one mobile money wallet. If you have more than one wallet – the other ones will be closed.

Before today’s declarations, RBZ placed limits on mobile money accounts and agent lines were suspended. Functionality of merchant lines was also restrained and the new rules increase pressure on mobile money services.

The post RBZ details faults of mobile money services which led to regulatory pressure appeared first on Techzim.

The assumed deadline for the ZimSwitch’s role as the national switch was the 15th of August 2020. That deadline has passed and that led many to wonder when this measure will come into effect. Earlier this week sources at EcoCash revealed that they hadn’t met the deadline that was set by the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe.

It would have been something of a miracle if the parties involved were able to able to intergrate by the 15th of August. In light of all of this, the RBZ’s Monetary Policy Statement gave something of an update as to the progress of all parties involved:

Pursuant to the statutory instrument, the Bank designated ZimswitchTechnologies (Private) Limited (Zimswitch) as a national payment switch, and required all payment service providers, including mobile payment operators, to be connected thereto.

With all banks and some mobile payment operators already connected to Zimswitch, connectivity by all payment service providers is expected to be completed by 30 September 2020.

Monetary Policy Statement

It is worth mentioning that outside of EcoCash mobile money operators like Telecash & OneMoney already had Zimswitch integration. However, making ZimSwitch the national switch is integration on a far deeper level. This isn’t easily achieved because EcoCash sits on a different platform and to put them on ZimSwitch was always going to be an undertaking.

Lastly, it’s safe to say that since EcoCash and others missed the original deadline. The 30th of September is surely a date that all parties involved had agreed to.

The post EcoCash & others given until 30 September to connect to ZimSwitch appeared first on Techzim.

In accordance with the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe’s Monetary Policy Statement on Friday EcoCash put out the following press release:

EcoCash
Notice to All EcoCash Customers
Dear Valued Customers
Please be advised that we have received a directive from the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe to the following effect;

1. Transactions by all individuals shall be pegged at a maximum of ZWS5,000 (five thousand Zimbabwe dollars) per day with immediate effect. This threshold relates to all transactions by the individual. including;
a. Payments to merchants for goods and services and payments for utility bills
b. Send Money and purchase of airtime and data
c. EcoCash Debit Card
d. Wallet to bank transfers

2. With immediate effect, no individual shall be allowed to operate more than one EcoCash line.

3. Merchants and Billers will continue to accept EcoCash Payments from customers,
a. Merchants and Billers are required to liquidate funds in their wallets to their Bank accounts only.

4. Agents
a, Agents’ mobile money wallets are to be abolished with immediate effect
b. Funds in frozen Agent lines will only be liquidated into the Agent’s Bank Account. The liquidation will require RBZ approval on case by case basis

5. Bulk Payers
a. The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe shall only approve the use of Bulk Payer lines for purposes of:
i, Disbursing low-value payments, such as disbursements for humanitarian aid
ii, Payments related to agricultural activities

b. Funds in frozen Bulk Payer lines can only be liquidated into the Bulk Payer’s Bank
Account upon approval by the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe for each Bulk Payer

We would like to reassure all our valued customers that EcoCash is committed to Offer mobile
money services that make a difference in people’s lives. We would also like to take this
opportunity to thank you for your valued and continued support.

EcoCash

You should also read:

RBZ announces mobile money rule: Individuals can’t have more than one wallet anymore

Agent lines banned by RBZ as “they no longer serve any legitimate purpose”

EcoCash & others given until 30 September to connect to ZimSwitch

RBZ details faults of mobile money services which led to regulatory pressure

The post EcoCash limits transactions to $5000 per day appeared first on Techzim.

Last week, we reported that the RBZ had announced with immediate effect that each individual would be allowed to only have one mobile money account. This means individuals with multiple EcoCash accounts will be affected.

The question that immediately came up was simple. “If I have two accounts which one will be closed?” Well, the MPS didn’t disclose how that would be done.

Which account will be closed?

We reached to EcoCash reps via Twitter customer support and they finally shed some light on this issue. Simply put if you have two or more accounts, the one(s) that transacts least will be closed.

Kindly note that the least transacting line will be closed. May you consider moving the funds to your most transacting line.

EcoCash ZW message via Twitter

What happens if the account is closed before you move funds?

Regarding what would happen if an account(s) is closed before funds have been moved the representative I spoke to, only noted that those with accounts that are functional should move funds as soon as possible.

The post 2 Ecocash accounts? The less active one will be closed appeared first on Techzim.

In abiding by the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe’s directives, EcoCash has instituted a ZWL$5000.00 a day limit on transactions. The outline of how this will affect daily transactions is as follows:

“Transactions by all individuals shall be pegged at a maximum of ZWS5,000 (five thousand Zimbabwe dollars) per day with immediate effect. This threshold relates to all transactions by the individual. including;
a. Payments to merchants for goods and services and payments for utility bills
b. Send Money and purchase of airtime and data
c. EcoCash Debit Card
d. Wallet to bank transfers”

EcoCash

Looking at the above they have not only included how much money you can spend on goods and services but the amount of money that you can transfer within your own accounts (wallet to bank).

So what exactly can you do with the ZWL$5000.00?

I think we can all agree that in the event of an emergency, for example, someone needing medical attention or an unexpected expense, ZWL$5000 will surely not be enough. Consultation fees with practitioners, if one isn’t on medical aid or if the practitioner doesn’t accept the form of medical aid presented, will leave many who transact on mobile money with some issues. This also doesn’t include the money that will be needed for medication and any other things needed in the space of that day.

Basic goods and services

So how much can one buy with ZWL$5000.00 in groceries?

The figures we are going by are from ZimPriceCheck August 2020 grocery prices. The prices they listed were from selected stores and there are some outlets that they didn’t have prices for. These prices will vary from outlet to outlet, but it’s just to give us a rough idea of what ZWL5000.00 can buy.

Basic grocery needs:

Just a little over the ZWL$5000 EcoCash limit.

There were no prices for perishables (Meat, Fruit and Vegetables).

Utilities

Using Techzim’s ZESA Calculator ZWL$5000.00 will get you 1220.29kWh of electricity. A bit beyond what the average household will need, but there are those who may operate in light to medium industry, this may be a ballpark figure of the electricity they use.

The cost of fuel

If you are one of those fortunate enough to find a filling station that is selling fuel in RTGS, according to ZERA’s most recent price listing, the cost of petrol is ZWL$93.15 per litre and Diesel is $83.36 per litre. So for ZWL$5000.00 will get you 53.68 Litres of petrol and 59.98L of diesel.

Well, again that’s if you are lucky to come across a service station that is selling fuel in local currency.

Mobile data and home internet

For most mobile data (as well as airtime) packages, when the limit is looked at in isolation to them, aren’t really affected. The problem comes with some ZOL nad TelOne packages that exceed ZWL$5000.00, those look like they may have to be paid in part until the balance for the package is reached. This means that payments for these packages may have to be planned out well in advance. They will also have to planned around other payments.

Conclusion

This EcoCash ZWL$5000.00 limit restricts financial freedom on mobile money. The value of the ZWL$5000 in goods and services goes beyond the things listed above. Other things not covered are things like rent, school fees, medical insurance, vehicle registration, transport costs and many others.

The limit will change how people use mobile money. The alternative when faced with a large transaction or set of transactions will be to pay them off in parts. Another situation that could arise is being near or at the limit and then facing an expense like electricity. That means if there is no other alternative to mobile money then that payment will have to be made the next day.

This restriction could also see more people adopt (on top of conventional banking platforms) the use of cash, USD to specific. Some people could adopt the use of USD to avoid the limit as well as to sidestep the 2% Tax (which applies to bank card as well). This, however, is for those who have the USD, to begin with, and that doesn’t cover everyone.

It’s also worth mentioning that this limit also affects Telecash and OneMoney.

The post What can you buy with the ZWL$5000 EcoCash limit? appeared first on Techzim.

EcoCash Payroll and NetOne’s OnePay solution pretty much solve the same problem – allowing businesses to pay their employees salaries. The RBZs recent pronouncements in the Monetary Policy statement indicate that payroll services face existential threat.

In the Monetary Policy Statement, RBZ says the following;

Mobile payment operators have been turning a blind eye and have even actively encouraged the abuse of bulk payment wallets for illegal foreign currency transactions, thus earning lucrative transaction fees in the process.

Going forward, bulk payment wallets will be approved by regulatory authorities for limited use, primarily for low-value transactions and humanitarian funds disbursements to vulnerable members of society.

Any other bulk payment transactions, such as payment of salaries and wages, should be processed through normal banking channels.

What does this mean?

It appears that bulk payments for processing of salaries and wages are now restricted to banks only. The only bulk payments still permitted are those of low values or donation type payments (humanitarian causes).

We reached out to different sources within Econet/EcoCash to get a better understanding of what is going on.

We got conflicting responses. One source confirmed that EcoCash Payroll will most definitely be affected. They also noted that the fact that NGOs payments were still permitted is a saving grace. Those payments are a significant chunk of bulk payments. From the MPS it does seem like these transactions will need the regulator’s sign-off which adds friction to bulk payments.

Another source we spoke to was more hesitant to confirm what this meant and said the directive wasn’t clear.

We also spoke a NetOne insider who confirmed that OnePay would most probably be affected by this regulation.

Regulator’s wrath

Mobile Money operators (EcoCash) have been under the microscope of the regulator for much of the year. This is because the regulator has identified mobile money platforms as being used to aid illicit foreign currency trade. In an attempt to put a stop to this illegal trade the following has been banned or restricted;

• Mobile money agent lines banned permanently;
• Reduction of mobile money transaction limits;
• Limit on the number of mobile money accounts that an individual can have.

The post EcoCash Payroll and OnePay under threat as RBZ directive suggests banning of salary processing appeared first on Techzim.

RBZ issued a monetary statement directing mobile money wallets to suspend agent accounts and set a daily limit of Z$5000. In this video we look at what this means for the average Zimbabwean as well as who is most affected.

The post Video: EcoCash sets daily limit at Z$5000. Who is hit hardest? appeared first on Techzim.

Many people were wondering if OneMoney and Telecash would all be subjected to the same regulations that were recently put into effect by EcoCash. Well, OneMoney is the second mobile money operator to effect the ZW$5000/daily transaction limit.

NetOne subscribers received the message below this morning;

Dear Customer. Following a RBZ directive, OneMoney transactions are now limited to $5000 per day with immediate effect. Inconveniences caused are regretted.

A lot of people assumed that the new regulation applied to EcoCash exclusively but that doesn’t make sense. The issue the RBZ is trying to solve is that of illegal foreign currency trade. If regulation only affected EcoCash, money changers would simply flock to the less regulated platform.

RBZs regulation plainly stated that ALL mobile money providers would have to adhere to the new regulatory position. Targeting EcoCash in isolation would also give EcoCash a foot to stand on in a court of law against the regulator.

It’s unclear at the moment, if Telecel has already effected a similar limit on their platform.

The post OneMoney follows EcoCash and effects ZW$5000 daily transaction limit appeared first on Techzim.

The RBZ recently placed stricter regulations on mobile money service providers. You may have heard that you can no longer transact over ZW$5000 daily.

Interestingly, we came across a WhatsApp message that we believe is a scam. It claims that you can actually upgrade your EcoCash account and once you have done so you’ll be able to transact above the limit!

You can read the message below;

URGENT NOTICE

IMPORTANT NOTICE

ALL THOSE WITH AGENT LINES, MERCHANT LINES THAT WHERE SUSPENDED WITH FUNDS AND WANT THEM TO BE MOVED TO THEIR ECOCASH ACCOUNTS OR BANK ACCOUNTS PLEASE CONTACT THE NUMBER BELOW AND GET YOUR MONEY BEFORE IT LOSES VALUE.

PROCESS IS DONE IN LESS THAN 30 TO 45 MINS

ECOCASH HAS GAZZETED THAT ALL INDIVIDUALS ARE TO TRANSACT 5000 PER DAY ONLY BUT IF YOU WANT TO UPGRADE TO ECONET EXECUTIVE MEMBER AND TRANSACT UP TO 50000 RTGS PER DAY MAXIMUM LIMIT CONTACT THE FOLLOWING NUMBER FOR UPGRADE

N.B FOR ALL ECOCASH QUERIES, REVERSALS, HANGING TRANSACTION CONTACT NUMBER ASWELL

So why is this a scam. Well first of all, EcoCash doesn’t make official pronouncement via WhatsApp. That right there is the biggest red flag.

Secondly, there are number of spelling mistakes, along with statements that make no sense. This suggests this wasn’t written by any PR person or someone fully aware of what is happening;

• ALL THOSE WITH AGENT LINES, MERCHANT LINES THAT WHERE SUSPENDED – Where instead of were;
• ALL THOSE WITH AGENT LINES, MERCHANT LINES THAT WHERE SUSPENDED WITH FUNDS AND WANT THEM TO BE MOVED TO THEIR ECOCASH ACCOUNTS – RBZ said money in suspended agent lines would be moved to bank accounts and not EcoCash accounts as claimed here;
• ECOCASH HAS GAZZETED THAT ALL INDIVIDUALS ARE TO TRANSACT 5000 PER DAY – This wasn’t “gazetted” by EcoCash but by RBZ actually;
• IF YOU WANT TO UPGRADE TO ECONET EXECUTIVE MEMBER AND TRANSACT UP TO 50000 RTGS PER DAY MAXIMUM LIMIT CONTACT THE FOLLOWING NUMBER FOR UPGRADE – Econet and EcoCash are now separate entities and thus official EcoCash communications wouldn’t conflate the two

Anyway the greater point is this ticks the box on what seems like a scam and even if you’re desperate to get your money out of a suspended agent line – this is the worst route to take.

The post Beware! Scammers promising to upgrade daily EcoCash account limits appeared first on Techzim.