SMBs Go Global: 3 Ways Bank Partnerships Can Transform The Small Business Payments Experience
By Jeff Koyen
America's small and medium-sized businesses ('SMBs') employ almost half (46%) of the U.S. workforce, about 59 million people,[1] and account for 43.5% of the country's GDP.[2] They're also firmly on the rebound as quarterly small business employment growth returns to pre-Covid levels.[3]
Meanwhile, SMBs are becoming more globalized and connected around the world. According to PCMI market research commissioned by Visa, nearly one-third of American SMBs make cross-border payments—international transactions that often help them manage suppliers, customers and operations.[4]
getty
Yet some major financial institutions fail to meet these clients' needs—especially when it comes to fast, efficient and cost-effective cross-border payments.
Forzley co-founded VEEM (which stands for 'Very Easy Exchange of Money') to solve these problems. In 2022, the San Francisco-based payments platform joined a number of other digital financial services platforms that are partnering with Visa Direct to remove friction from global payments.
So how can financial technology (fintech) innovators like VEEM close the gap between global payment expectations and real-world experiences? And how can that, in turn, help banks deliver new solutions for small businesses?
Below, explore three ways financial institutions can use emerging fintech to create a better banking experience for their SMB customers.
As every entrepreneur and executive knows, your business is only as strong as its balance sheet. For SMBs that rely on overseas suppliers and customers, managing cash flow can be a huge challenge. Due to the limitations of traditional banking, the process of getting paid and paying suppliers can take several days, even weeks.
That's not a problem for Fintechs, like VEEM, that connect to the Visa Direct network.
Without Visa Direct, payment platforms often rely on existing global banking infrastructure, such as SWIFT and correspondent banking, which do not meet the demands of most modern SMBs. Settling payments on traditional networks can take days.
Visa, meanwhile, provides day-after settlement, which allows clients and partners, and their SMB customers, to send funds more quickly to payees and beneficiaries.
Visa Direct also brings greater transparency to global payment processes, which was the case for VEEM.
With Visa Direct, SMB customers can instead know exactly where their money is—helping them make more informed decisions.
Visa Direct helps financial institutions to solidify account primacy by embedding real-time cross-border capabilities that keep SMBs transacting within their ecosystem—reducing outflows to other providers, improving future cross-sell opportunities.
The digital economy may be global, but currency exchange rates remind us that borders still exist. When sending and receiving payments, SMBs can find themselves at the mercy of exchange rates. Imagine sending $1,000 to an overseas supplier on Monday morning, only to learn it's worth $950 when the payment finally clears.
Real-time payments help solve this problem by reducing the settlement lifecycle. Visa Direct also offers its banking clients another tool: multi-currency accounts.
Traditional banking institutions, on the other hand, convert foreign currencies according to their own schedule. Clients have no control or visibility into the process, potentially leaving a lot of money on the exchange rate table.
For SMBs that regularly transact with the same overseas customers and suppliers, converting between currencies may not even be necessary. Using multi-currency accounts, they can hold funds in foreign currency and use these accounts to conduct their back-and-forth business.
While foreign exchange fluctuations are unavoidable, these types of tools allow SMBs to have more control and visibility. Visa Direct enables financial institutions to offer multi-currency solutions that increase deposits and generate new revenue streams while giving SMBs more flexibility and control—all within the bank's branded environment.
All too often, small and medium-sized organizations can feel ignored when their banks scale up to go after bigger enterprises. SMBs working across borders may feel this even more keenly with, for example, new fee schedules that benefit higher-volume clients.
In Meszaros' view, ignoring those SMB pain points is a mistake.
The issue may be one of perception: Modern small businesses extend far beyond the local grocery stores or mom-and-pop pharmacies that were once unlikely to expand beyond regional markets. Today's SMBs are comprised of startups, innovators, eager entrepreneurs and others seeking opportunities for growth.
When banks stop paying attention to the changing SMB landscape, they may—inadvertently or not—remove the features, functions and favorable fees that help SMBs compete in global markets.
When financial institutions overlook these evolving needs, they risk ceding ground to more agile fintechs that are actively courting SMBs with tailored, tech-forward offerings. The result? A gradual erosion of wallet share, weakened brand loyalty and a missed opportunity to grow long-term, high-value relationships with the next generation of business customers. Financial institutions that ignore small business needs may also find that their SMB customers start looking for other providers to fulfill them.
In the case of VEEM, Forzley embraces the SMB market as an enormous opportunity.
His company's partnership with Visa Direct, he adds, 'has been instrumental in making our vision a reality.'
By leveraging Visa Direct, financial institutions can differentiate in a competitive market by launching SMB-first solutions that deepen engagement, build loyalty and position themselves as an innovation partner.
*Actual funds availability depends on receiving financial institution and region.
[1] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 'Small businesses contributed 55 percent of the total net job creation from 2013 to 2023', May 2024. https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2024/small-businesses-contributed-55-percent-of-the-total-net-job-creation-from-2013-to-2023.htm
[2] U.S. Small Business Administration, 'Frequently Asked Questions About Small Business, 2024', July 2024. https://advocacy.sba.gov/2024/07/23/frequently-asked-questions-about-small-business-2024/#:~:text=Small%20businesses%20are%2043.5%25%20of,small%20businesses%20in%20FY%202022
[3] U.S. Small Business Administration, 'Economic Bulletin, Fourth Quarter 2024', January 2025. https://advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Economic-Bulletin-Fourth-Qtr-2024_FINAL.pdf
[4] Visa PCMI Payments & Commerce Market Intelligence, 'SMB Payments–Visa Direct Market Fit Analysis', July 2024.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
35 minutes ago
- CBS News
Police cast wide net in probe of defunct North Texas car dealership's business practices
Desire Godfrey said it was time for a vehicle upgrade. The Lancaster mother had her eye on a Lexus. "I had a baby, so I'm looking for something reliable for me and a baby," Godfrey said. She searched online and found what she thought was the right vehicle at The Reserve Auto Group in The Colony. She described the sales process in May 2024 as a positive experience. Warranty and GAP insurance issues But an unexpected oil change six months later changed everything. Godfrey, 33, said a Lexus dealership informed her the vehicle was not under warranty. She also discovered her GAP insurance policy didn't exist. "They (Reserve Auto Group) never paid the warranty company the money they were supposed to pay to activate this warranty and this GAP insurance," she said. Car loan charges continue Godfrey said the costs were included in her car note. She filed a report with The Colony Police Department — and she's not alone. Police said they received their first complaint on Jan. 31. According to a news release, police have been investigating multiple fraud claims connected to the dealership since 2023. The business shut down in December 2024, but complaints continue to come in. Alleged auto fraud pattern Investigators said customers were allegedly instructed to write separate checks for aftermarket warranties or GAP insurance policies. Those payments were supposed to go to third-party providers, but police said the dealership allegedly cashed the checks and never forwarded the money — leaving customers without coverage. Another victim comes forward A second alleged victim, who spoke to CBS News Texas anonymously, said she and her husband also bought a Lexus from the dealership. She provided a non-activation letter from DOWC Administrative Services LLC, a company that offers GAP insurance and warranties. The letter stated: "Please be advised that Reserve Auto has failed to remit payment to Us as the Administrator and Provider for your Contract. Consequently, the Contract was not activated in our system." Investigation still ongoing Police have not made any arrests or publicly identified anyone associated with the allegations. Officers said they are continuing to vet additional alleged victims. CBS News Texas is not naming the person listed as the dealership's owner, as police have indicated he did nothing wrong. He spoke briefly by phone, saying he wanted to schedule an appointment to discuss the claims further because he believed "we did not have all the facts." When asked for clarification, he said he didn't have time to explain. Legal team responds Two emails followed the call, and attorneys from Herrin Law introduced themselves. "We have no comment at this time. Thank you for your interest in our client's side of the story," attorney Benjamin Palatiere said. He requested that all future inquiries be directed to him. Buyer left without coverage Meanwhile, Godfrey said the vehicle itself has not had any issues. But she continues to pay for a warranty and insurance that don't exist. "So nobody wants to refinance the loan. Nobody wants to give me GAP insurance," she said. "It's just more so like I'm going to take it or leave it. If I wreck the car, then I would have to figure out a way to pay that car off." Godfrey said she hopes to recover the money one day.
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
Supreme Court halts lower court orders requiring DOGE to hand over information about work and personnel
Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday halted lower court orders that required the White House's Department of Government Efficiency to turn over information to a government watchdog group as part of a lawsuit that tests whether President Trump's cost-cutting task force has to comply with federal public records law. The order from the high court clears DOGE for now from having to turn over records related to its work and personnel, and keeps Amy Gleason, identified as its acting administrator, from having to answer questions at a deposition. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. "The portions of the district court's April 15 discovery order that require the government to disclose the content of intra–executive branch USDS recommendations and whether those recommendations were followed are not appropriately tailored," the court said in its order. "Any inquiry into whether an entity is an agency for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act cannot turn on the entity's ability to persuade. Furthermore, separation of powers concerns counsel judicial deference and restraint in the context of discovery regarding internal executive branch communications." The Supreme Court sent the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for more proceedings. Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily paused the district court's order last month, which allowed the Supreme Court more time to consider the Trump administration's bid for emergency relief. A district judge had ordered DOGE to turn over documents to the group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, by June 3, and for Gleason's deposition to be completed by June 13. The underlying issue in the case involves whether DOGE is subject to the Freedom of Information Act. CREW argues that the cost-cutting task force wields "substantial independent authority," which makes it a de facto agency that must comply with federal public records law. The Justice Department, however, disagrees and instead claims that DOGE is a presidential advisory body housed within the Executive Office of the President that makes recommendations to the president and federal agencies on matters that are important to Mr. Trump's second-term agenda. DOGE's agency status was not before the Supreme Court, though the high court may be asked to settle that matter in the future. Instead, the Trump administration had asked the justices to temporarily halt a district court's order that allowed CREW to gather certain information from DOGE as part of its effort to determine whether the task force is an advisory panel that is outside FOIA's scope or is an agency that is subject to the records law. The judge overseeing the dispute, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, had ordered DOGE to turn over certain documents to the watchdog group by June 3 and to complete all depositions, including of Gleason, by June 13. Mr. Trump ordered the creation of DOGE on his first day back in the White House as part of his initiative to slash the size of the federal government. Since then, DOGE team members have fanned out to agencies across the executive branch and have been part of efforts to shrink the federal workforce and shutter entities like the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. Institute of Peace. DOGE has also attempted to gain access to sensitive databases kept by the Internal Revenue Service, Social Security Administration and Office of Personnel Management, prompting legal battles. In an effort to learn more about DOGE's structure and operations, CREW submitted an expedited FOIA request to the task force. After it did not respond in a timely manner, CREW filed a lawsuit and sought a preliminary injunction to expedite processing of its records request. The organization argued that DOGE was exercising significant independent authority, which made it an agency subject to FOIA. Cooper granted CREW's request for a preliminary injunction in March and agreed that FOIA likely applies to DOGE because it is "likely exercising substantial independent authority much greater than other [Executive Office of the President] components held to be covered by FOIA." He then allowed CREW to conduct limited information-gathering, which the watchdog group said aimed to determine whether DOGE is exercising substantial authority that would bring it within FOIA's reach. A federal appeals court ultimately declined to pause that order, requiring DOGE to turn over the documents sought by CREW. In seeking the Supreme Court's intervention, Solicitor General D. John Sauer said CREW is conducting a "fishing expedition" into DOGE's activities. He warned that if Cooper's order remains in place, several components of the White House, such as the offices of the chief of staff and national security adviser, would be subject to FOIA. "That untenable result would compromise the provision of candid, confidential advice to the president and disrupt the inner workings of the Executive Branch," Sauer wrote. "Yet, in the decisions below, the court of appeals and district court treated a presidential advisory body as a potential 'agency' based on the persuasive force of its recommendations — threatening opening season for FOIA requests on the president's advisors." But lawyers for CREW told the Supreme Court in a filing that the Justice Department's position "would require courts to blindly yield to the Executive's characterization" of the authority and operations of a component of the Executive Office of the President. They said adopting the Trump administration's approach to DOGE would give the president "free reign" to create new entities within the Executive Office of the President that exercise substantial independent authority but are shielded from transparency laws. "Courts would be forced to blindly accept the government's representations about an EOP unit's realworld operations, unable to test those representations through even limited discovery," CREW's lawyers wrote. "It is that extreme position, not the discovery order, that would 'turn[] FOIA on its head.'"
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
More Colleges Freeze Hiring And Suspend Salary Increases
Colleges and universities continue to look for ways to cut spending because of the Trump Administration's policies towards higher education. One June 2nd, Johns Hopkins University announced a set of policies to prepare for a possible decline in revenue. They join a list of schools including Brown University, Duke University, Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Washington, and the University of California system, that have temporarily paused hiring and vow to hold off on capital spending. Hopkins has already seen $850 million in grant cuts resulting from the culling of USAID and other program terminations, plus the school has a large number of international students (many who pay full tuition) who may be dissuaded from studying in the U.S. due to the Administration's more restrictive visa policies. Like a number of elite universities, Johns Hopkins relies heavily on tuition from international students attending its undergraduate and graduate programs. In the 2024-2025 academic year, over ten thousand foreign students were enrolled at Johns Hopkins according to the Institute of International Education. In addition to the hiring freeze, University President Ron Daniels also announced a pause in annual pay increases for employees earning $80,000 or more, a slowing of capital projects by 10% to 20%, and spending cuts for travel, events, food, and supplies. The salary freezes will likely squeeze faculty, who have seen real wages decline. From 2013 to 2023, average pay for faculty (when adjusted for inflation) has decreased by 1.5%, while administrative pay has risen by 4% for the same time frame. In addition, administrative staff positions at most universities and colleges has grown faster than faculty. There is no doubt the universities and colleges need to take steps to address the impact of the Trump Administration's policies. Although painful, the policies issued by Johns Hopkins and other schools are necessary in the near-term. But a different approach is needed long-term. One that doesn't rely on higher student tuition or faculty salaries that fall further behind inflation. These policies should include: The Trump Administration's policies towards colleges and their students may eventually be rolled back or reversed at some point, but in the meantime, higher education needs to rethink their budgets and what should be prioritized.
