Tiger Research: How Crypto Giants Are Betting on AI Agent Payment Infrastructure

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-02-22Востаннє оновлено о 2026-02-22

Анотація

Tiger Research explores how major tech companies and crypto sector are building payment infrastructure for AI Agents to enable fully autonomous transactions. Key points: - Payments are transitioning from human-initiated to AI Agent-executed, requiring new infrastructure. - Big Tech (e.g., Google's AP2) builds controlled, approval-based systems using existing platforms, prioritizing consumer protection and convenience but limiting interoperability. - Crypto solutions (ERC-8004 for NFT-based identity and x402 for smart contract payments) enable trustless, decentralized agent-to-agent transactions using stablecoins, emphasizing user sovereignty and permissionless access. - Google’s model operates within a restricted partner ecosystem, while crypto aims for open, programmable microtransactions. - Future may involve interoperability between closed and open systems rather than a winner-takes-all outcome.

This report is written by Tiger Research. To achieve true autonomous automation, native payment capabilities are essential. The market has already begun to actively position itself for this shift.

Core Points

  • The payer is shifting from humans to AI Agents, making payment infrastructure a core requirement for achieving true autonomy.
  • Big Tech companies (including Google AP2 and OpenAI Delegated Payment) are designing approval-based automated payment systems on top of existing platform infrastructure.
  • Cryptocurrency utilizes NFT-based identity and smart contracts through standards like ERC-8004 and x402 to achieve a disintermediated payment model.
  • Big Tech prioritizes convenience and consumer protection, while cryptocurrency emphasizes user sovereignty and broader Agent-level execution capabilities.
  • The key future question is: Will payments be controlled by platforms or executed by open protocols?

1. Payments Are No Longer Exclusive to Humans

Source: macstories (Feder1C0 Viticci)

Recently, "OpenClaw" has garnered significant attention. Unlike AI systems like ChatGPT or Gemini, which primarily focus on retrieving and organizing information, OpenClaw allows AI Agents to execute tasks directly on the user's local PC or server.

Through instant messaging platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram, and Slack, users can issue commands, and the Agent then autonomously executes tasks, including email management, calendar coordination, and web browsing.

As it runs as open-source software and is not tied to a specific platform, OpenClaw functions more like a personal AI assistant. This architecture is favored for its flexibility and user-level control.

However, a critical limitation remains. For AI Agents to achieve full autonomy, they must be able to execute payments. Currently, Agents can search for products, compare options, and add items to a cart, but final payment authorization still requires human approval.

Historically, payment systems were designed around human actors. In an AI Agent-driven environment, this assumption no longer holds. If automation is to become fully autonomous, Agents must be able to independently evaluate, authorize, and complete transactions within defined constraints.

Anticipating this shift, both Big Tech companies and crypto-native projects have introduced technical frameworks over the past year aimed at enabling Agent-level payments.

2. Big Tech: Building Agent Payments on Existing Infrastructure

In January 2025, Google launched AP2 (Agent Payment Protocol 2.0), expanding its AI Agent payment infrastructure. While OpenAI and Amazon have also outlined related initiatives, Google is currently the only major company with a structured implementation framework.

AP2 divides the transaction process into three Mandate Layers. This structure allows for independent monitoring and auditing of each stage.

  • Intent Mandate: Records the action the user wants to perform.
  • Cart Mandate: Defines how a purchase should be executed under preset rules.
  • Payment Mandate: Executes the actual transfer of funds.

Example: Suppose Ekko asks an AI Agent on Google Shopping to "find and buy a winter jacket under $200".

  • Intent Mandate: Ekko instructs the AI Agent to buy "a winter jacket with a maximum budget of $200". This information is recorded on-chain as a digital contract, the Intent Mandate.
  • Cart Mandate: The AI Agent follows the intent, searches for matches among partner merchants, and adds eligible items to the cart. Verifies the price ($199, within budget ✓), confirms the shipping address.
  • Payment Mandate: Ekko reviews the selected item and clicks approve. The $199 is processed via Google Pay. Alternatively, the AI Agent can complete the payment automatically within preset parameters.

Throughout this process, the user does not need to input additional information. Google AP2 relies on existing user credentials (pre-registered cards and addresses), which lowers the barrier to entry and simplifies the adoption process.

Source: Google

However, Google currently only supports Agent payments for companies within its partner network. Consequently, its usage is confined to a controlled ecosystem, limiting broader interoperability and open access.

3. Cryptocurrency: Self-Custody and Open Exchange

The crypto space is also developing payment infrastructure for AI Agents, but its approach differs significantly from Big Tech. Big platforms build trust within controlled ecosystems, while crypto starts from a different question: Can AI Agents be trusted without relying on centralized platforms?

Two core standards aim to address this goal: Ethereum's ERC-8004 and Coinbase's x402.

First is the identity layer. AI Agents operating on the blockchain must be identifiable. ERC-8004 serves this function. It is issued as an NFT, but not as an art collectible; rather, it is a credential NFT containing structured identity data. Each token consists of three parts:

  1. Identity
  2. Reputation
  3. Validation

These elements together form a verifiable on-chain identity certificate.

Regarding the payment mechanism, x402 acts as the payment pathway. Developed by Coinbase, x402 is a crypto-native payment standard for AI Agents. It enables Agents to conduct autonomous transactions using stablecoins. Its core feature is automated smart contract execution, where conditional logic is embedded directly into the code, and settlement occurs without human intervention once conditions are met.

When ERC-8004 (identity) is combined with x402 (payment), AI Agents can verify counterparties and execute transactions without relying on a centralized platform.

Example: Ekko instructs his Agent A to buy a used laptop with a maximum budget of $800. The seller's Agent B communicates directly with it.
  • Mutual Verification: Checks identity and reputation score via ERC-8004 NFT (e.g., Reputation 72, balance confirmed).
  • Smart Contract Escrow: $800 is transferred from the wallet into a smart contract escrow, locking the funds until delivery confirmation.
  • Settlement & Reputation Update: Upon transaction completion, x402 automatically settles, and the reputation records of both parties are automatically updated and written into their respective ERC-8004 NFTs.

Throughout this process, no intermediaries are involved. The two AI Agents transact directly through blockchain-based verification and settlement, embodying the crypto-native model of Agent-to-Agent (A2A) commerce.

4. Big Tech vs. Cryptocurrency: Differences in the AI Agent Operational Domain

Google AP2 represents a controlled model designed for vetted partners. Google restricts market participants to protect consumers. Because AI Agent execution has probabilistic outcomes rather than being entirely deterministic, liability for transaction error may ultimately fall on the payment infrastructure provider. To reduce the probability of failure, Google has an incentive to narrow its ecosystem.

A restricted ecosystem increases stability but also limits the Agent's ability to operate autonomously and optimize choices across a broader market.

In contrast, ERC-8004 and x402 reflect a more open architecture. The crypto model is designed for permissionless access and interoperability.

While end-to-end execution is not yet perfect, the long-term vision is for Agents to independently manage daily consumption. Big platforms may attempt to integrate major retail channels, but open crypto standards have a structural advantage in handling small, high-frequency programmatic payments (micropayments). For example, if an Agent buys 1000 stock images at $0.01 each, the operational efficiency of the crypto-native path is higher.

Of course, the lack of a central authority involves trade-offs: identity evaluation standards must be established in a decentralized manner, and there is no single entity with ultimate responsibility for failures.

Summary

Both Big Tech and the crypto space are pursuing the same goal: enabling autonomous AI Agent commerce. The difference lies in the architecture: Big Tech favors closed, controlled systems, while crypto advances open, protocol-based models.

The future trend is more likely to be the interoperability of both approaches, rather than a zero-sum game.

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the key limitation preventing AI Agents from achieving full autonomy according to the article?

AThe key limitation is that AI Agents currently cannot execute payments independently; final payment authorization still requires human approval.

QHow does Google's AP2 (Agent Payment Protocol 2.0) structure the transaction process for AI Agent payments?

AGoogle's AP2 divides the transaction process into three mandate layers: Intent Mandate (recording the user's desired action), Cart Mandate (defining how the purchase should be executed under preset rules), and Payment Mandate (executing the actual transfer of funds).

QWhat are the two core standards in the cryptocurrency space for enabling AI Agent payments, and what are their respective roles?

AThe two core standards are ERC-8004, which provides a verifiable on-chain identity for AI Agents using NFT-based credentials, and x402, which serves as a payment standard allowing Agents to autonomously transact with stablecoins using smart contract execution.

QWhat is the primary difference in approach between big tech companies and the cryptocurrency sector regarding AI Agent payment infrastructure?

ABig tech companies prioritize controlled, closed ecosystems with consumer protection and convenience, while the cryptocurrency sector emphasizes user sovereignty, permissionless access, and open, interoperable protocols for broader Agent-level execution.

QHow do ERC-8004 and x402 work together to enable direct AI Agent-to-Agent (A2A) transactions without intermediaries?

AERC-8004 provides a verifiable on-chain identity and reputation for AI Agents, while x402 standard enables automated payment execution via smart contracts. Together, they allow Agents to mutually verify identities, lock funds in escrow, and autonomously settle transactions without relying on centralized platforms.

Пов'язані матеріали

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

The era of fragmented AI agents is ending. Over the past month, China's tech giants—Tencent, Alibaba, and ByteDance—have simultaneously shifted strategy: instead of launching new, standalone AI agents, they are consolidating their various agent projects into unified "super workbenches." Tencent integrated its QClaw teams into WorkBuddy, a strategic product hailed as a potential third flagship after QQ and WeChat. Alibaba is merging its QoderWork, Wukong, and MuleRun agents into a new "Qianwen Office" platform under DingTalk's leadership. ByteDance rebranded its TRAE SOLO coding agent to TRAE Work, signaling a broader focus on workflow collaboration. This convergence marks a pivotal industry consensus. The initial exploration phase, where companies rapidly built numerous overlapping agents for different scenarios, proved costly and inefficient. With open-source tools eroding technical barriers, competition has shifted from agent creation to resource consolidation and cost control. Historically, platform wars are won not by creating more products, but by simplifying them—as seen with browsers unifying web access and super-apps consolidating services. Now, the "super workbench" aims to become the unified AI entry point for work. This reflects a deeper market realization: the primary audience for AI is no longer just programmers (a market in the tens of millions) but all knowledge workers (a market of billions). The real opportunity lies in augmenting everyday tasks—managing emails, documents, data, and meetings—across the entire workday. The core battleground is becoming control over the primary AI entry point that employees use daily. Tencent's WorkBuddy leverages WeChat and Tencent Docs; Alibaba's Qianwen Office taps into DingTalk's organizational data; ByteDance's TRAE Work integrates with Feishu's workflows. Whoever owns this "super workbench" gains strategic control over orchestrating enterprise data and APIs. This shift is redefining enterprise software. Traditional SaaS applications, valued for their user interfaces, will recede into the background. Their core functionalities will be exposed as standardized "Skills" or APIs for the super workbench's agents to invoke. Software value will shift from selling user seats to charging based on API calls and outcomes delivered. The evolution of agents is moving through clear stages: first as novel standalone products, then as consolidated primary work entry points, and finally as pervasive, invisible capabilities embedded into the digital fabric. The recent moves by major tech firms signal the transition from the first stage into the second, accelerating toward the third. In the end, the most successful agent technology may become invisible—like electricity or the HTTP protocol—a fundamental, unnamed infrastructure powering work itself.

marsbit9 хв тому

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

marsbit9 хв тому

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

Michael Saylor presents 110 arguments against Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 110, a soft fork aimed at restricting certain non-monetary data storage uses (like inscriptions) on the Bitcoin blockchain. He acknowledges the proponents' valid concerns—such as node costs, fee pressure, and preserving Bitcoin's monetary focus—but fundamentally disagrees with the proposed solution. Saylor argues that BIP 110 represents a dangerous precedent of using consensus rules to enforce value judgments on transaction validity, moving away from Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and permissionless innovation. His key objections are organized into eleven categories: 1) It violates neutrality and hard consensus by banning currently valid transactions. 2) It fails to meet the high burden of proof required for a consensus change, lacking concrete data on the alleged crisis. 3) Its seven bundled technical restrictions are overly broad, targeting generic script functionalities and blocking future upgrade paths. 4) It sacrifices compatibility and future optionality by closing off designed upgrade hooks. 5) Its temporary rules add significant complexity (grandfathering, expiry states) without sufficient justification. 6) The economic and security impacts, particularly on miner revenue and fee markets, are uncertain and unmodeled. 7) Superior, market-based tools (fee markets, relay/mining policies) already exist to manage blockchain load. 8) It stifles innovation by creating a chilling effect for developers. 9) Its modified activation mechanism (55% threshold, forced signaling) is aggressive and risks network splits. 10) The precedent it sets—using consensus to suppress disliked but legal uses—is more dangerous than the problem it aims to solve. 11) A better path exists: improving measurements, refining resource-based policies, and allowing market forces to work. Saylor concludes that Bitcoin's strength lies in its neutral rules, open markets, and hard consensus. Changing these foundational elements to target specific use cases is an unnecessary and risky "iatrogenic" intervention. He advocates for guarding Bitcoin's neutrality rather than acting as its redeemer.

marsbit24 хв тому

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

marsbit24 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片