PromptPay has its pluses, but people must have a choice
PromptPay, formerly known as “ANY ID”, which is part of Thailand’s planned e-Payment system, has raised concerns among Thais about security and privacy since it was announced two weeks ago.
PromptPay is a system for money transfer that ties ID numbers or/and mobile phone numbers with bank accounts so that transferees can use any of their numbers instead of bank account numbers to transfer money.
There will also be no transaction fee it the amount does not exceed Bt5,000. The fee is capped at a maximum of Bt10 per transaction if the amount transferred exceeds Bt100,000, even if the transactions are executed between different banks or different zones. Currently, customers are charged Bt25 per transaction for transfer of money to accounts in a different bank or in different zones irrespective of the amount. Even transferring Bt100 would entail a transaction fee of Bt25.
The new plan looks good. So why are so many people sceptical even if the authorities have explained that the system is safe as it was developed as an extension of the current money transfer system we are using in daily life?
Some experts in the IT and computer technology field pointed out that the kind of risks we could face when using “PromptPay” should be the same as in the current system, where money transfers can be done via bank branches, ATM, mobile banking or Internet banking.
There is no denying the government’s good intention in creating a central financial transferring system that will possibly be connected to other things in the future, making people’s living more convenient at a lower cost. In additional, the government can manage its tax collection more effectively.
Authorities and banks argue that the ID number is already commonly used when people want to open a new bank account or make any transactions at banks. PromptPay, which is now being opened for registration and will take effect in October, at the first stage will only facilitate money transfer from others, and cannot be used for transferring or paying money to the others. Another argument is that PromptPay users do not need to worry about security.
But the key area of vulnerability is the 13-digit “ID” number, which will be tied with the bank account under the PromptPay system.
How can one be sure there will be no abuse of information by any government official?
At many press conferences addressed made by the authorities, it has been revealed that PromptPay would be used by the government to pay for social welfare and money assistance and the number will tie the bank account with the ID number. Why should the ID number not be just a choice?
Moreover, any banks that jointly provide the PromptPay service should make clear about the dispute process and disclaimers. The banks must be required to ask clients every time they offer them additional services relating to PromptPay. For example, those clients who accept the PromptPay service at the first stage, where they are recipients of money transferred does not mean they accept all PromptPay services. If the banks, in the next step, offer “request to pay” or “RPP” service by which the users can transfer money out of their bank accounts to others, they should be required to ask their clients first.
What we saw perhaps is not what we got. A larger number of e-money transactions does not necessarily mean it’s okay for all Thai people to embrace the PromptPay system.
Given that the government’s public relations effort on this issue is weak, many people with lower levels of digital literacy are usually gullible. And this might be an impediment to move the country towards a digital economy.
