India Cracks Down: Stricter Rules To Combat Rising Digital Payments Fraud

bitcoinist發佈於 2025-09-26更新於 2025-09-26

文章摘要

India has launched a sharp clampdown on online payment scams, ordering tougher checks and new rules that aim to cut...

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

India has launched a sharp clampdown on online payment scams, ordering tougher checks and new rules that aim to cut the rising tide of fraud. Based on reports, regulators and payment networks moved after authorities recorded big jumps in both the number of cases and the money lost to scams last year.

India: RBI And NPCI Move Fast

Regulators have pushed several changes into the banking and payments system. According to published figures, incidents tied to Unified Payments Interface or UPI more than doubled from about 7.25 lakh ($8,700) to 13.42 lakh ($16,200) in fiscal year 2023-24.

Reported losses rose too, from ₹573 crore ($69 million) the year before to ₹1,087 crore ($131 million) in 2023-24. The central bank has allowed risk-based additional checks for certain transactions, and NPCI has told banks and apps to block pull or collect requests on UPI from October 1, 2025, a move meant to shut a common scam vector.

New Authentication And Domain Rules

One of the headline changes is a requirement for two-factor authentication for payments, set to come into effect on April 1, 2026. Banks and payment firms will need to apply at least two methods of ID for transactions — such as biometrics, device tokens, or passphrases — while SMS OTPs will still be allowed in some cases.

Reports also say the industry will be asked to reserve clear, trusted web domains for banks and finance firms — examples given include “bank.in” for banks and “fin.in” for non-bank financial companies — to make phishing sites easier to spot and block.

Total crypto market cap currently at $3.67 trillion. Chart: TradingView

How Users And Banks Will Be Affected

The new rules are meant to stop impersonation scams, fake calls that pretend to be law enforcement, and other social engineering tricks that send money out of accounts.

A special Cyber Fraud Mitigation Centre and the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre will coordinate responses, and a suspect registry drawn from the national cybercrime portal is being used to track suspicious accounts and identities.

Banks and small operators that run Aadhaar-enabled payment services will face stricter due diligence requirements for their agents and terminals.

Costs, Complexity And The Rural Gap

Banks and tech providers must upgrade systems to run the extra checks and keep records. That will add cost and complexity, especially for smaller firms and rural operators that rely on older devices.

Users may face more steps when they pay, particularly for cross-border or unusual transactions. Reports warn that fraudsters often change tactics after rules tighten, so the measures will need constant review and active enforcement to stay effective.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

Christian, a journalist and editor with leadership roles in Philippine and Canadian media, is fueled by his love for writing and cryptocurrency. Off-screen, he's a cook and cinephile who's constantly intrigued by the size of the universe.

你可能也喜歡

伊利诺伊州0.2%加密货币税引发全面法律诉讼

伊利诺伊州一项针对数字资产交易征收0.2%税率的法案,正引发区块链协会和加密创新委员会等组织的全面法律诉讼。起诉方于8月21日向该州地方法院提起诉讼,要求宣布《数字资产税收法》无效并阻止其在2025年1月1日生效。 诉讼的核心争议在于该税的征收方式。与针对资本利得征税的传统方式不同,该法规定,当用户通过数字资产经纪商进行某些操作时,即使交易未产生利润,也需按资产价值缴纳0.2%的税。这意味着单纯的比特币转账、账户间移资或支付托管服务费都可能触发纳税义务,而股票交易、银行转账或实物资产托管却无类似税负。原告指控该税实质上是针对“存储或转移价值的机制”而非经济交易本身。 法案的模糊性带来更多问题。例如,一次加密货币购买可能涉及交易、入账和托管等多个环节,但法案未明确这算作一个还是多个应税事件。对于持续性的资产托管,是按年、按结算周期还是按余额变动来计税也未有界定,可能导致税单金额出现数量级差异。此外,“资产价值”的评估时点、如何准确判定用户身处伊利诺伊州等问题都规定不清,迫使经纪商依赖推测并承担巨大的合规风险及潜在刑事责任。 诉讼还挑战了法案的立法程序。该法案最初仅两页,后在未充分公众讨论的情况下,被扩充为涵盖多主题的1624页庞大议案,数字资产税收部分不足20页。原告认为这违反了州宪法程序,并指控该税歧视电子商务,违背了联邦《互联网税收自由法案》和商业条款。 目前,原告正寻求法院在明年1月法案生效前颁布禁令。此案将成为测试各州能否对数字资产金融活动单独征税的关键一役。

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

伊利诺伊州0.2%加密货币税引发全面法律诉讼

cryptonews.ru1 小時前

交易

現貨
活动图片