Paying Asian Suppliers from Latin America: A Practical Guide for Importers
Introduction: The Latin America–Asia Trade Corridor
Trade between Latin America and Asia has expanded rapidly, creating opportunities and challenges for cross-border procurement. By 2024, bilateral trade between China and Latin America reached a record $518 billion, and in 2025, data from the General Administration of Customs reported 3.93 trillion yuan (~$565 billion) in trade, setting a new high.
The economic relationship is mutually complementary: Latin American and Caribbean countries supply minerals, agricultural products, and energy, while China exports high-tech goods, machinery, and manufactured products.
For importers in Brazil, Mexico, and Chile, sourcing patterns are evolving:
- →China remains the primary source for industrial equipment, electronics, machinery, and consumer goods
- →Vietnam is emerging as a supplier for textiles, furniture, footwear, and electronics assembly
- →India is growing as a source for pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and light manufacturing
Despite growing trade volumes, the financial infrastructure connecting these continents has struggled to keep pace. Traditional SWIFT-based correspondent banking, USD-denominated settlements, and manual compliance workflows create friction, especially for SMEs that lack large treasury teams.
The core challenge is not that payments are impossible, but that they are slower, more costly, and less transparent than what the current trade volumes require.
The Real Cost of Paying Asian Suppliers: A Quantified View
When a Latin American importer pays an Asian supplier, the true cost of payment includes four main components. Most businesses only budget for the first two, underestimating the total impact on working capital and operations.
- →FX Spread – The Visible Cost
Cross-border payments often involve multiple currency conversions:
| Conversion Step | Typical Spread | Source |
|---|---|---|
| BRL → USD (retail bank rate) | 1.5% – 3.5% | Brazilian Central Bank (BCB, 2024) |
| USD → CNY (correspondent bank) | 0.5% – 1.5% | World Bank, Remittance Prices (WB, 2024) |
| Combined effective spread | 2.0% – 5.0% | Cumulative estimate |
Example: For a $100,000 order, dual conversion can cost $2,000–$5,000 in FX spreads.
Alternative: Platforms offering direct conversion from BRL → CNY may reduce spreads to 0.5%–1.5%, saving $500–$3,500 per $100,000 transaction, depending on provider and market conditions.
⚠️ Note: FX rates vary by provider, transaction size, and market conditions. Always request a firm quote and check mid-market rates.
- →Transaction and Intermediary Fees – The Partially Visible Cost
| Payment Method | Typical Fee Structure |
|---|---|
| SWIFT bank transfer (full correspondent chain) | $25–$65 sending fee + $15–$45 per intermediary bank (1–3 intermediaries typical) |
| Modern B2B payment platform | Flat fee or percentage, typically lower than full SWIFT chain |
| Traditional bank wire (direct correspondent) | $30–$80 flat, depending on bank and corridor |
Source: World Bank Remittance Prices Worldwide database; individual bank published fee schedules.
- →Settlement Delay – The Invisible Working Capital Cost
Delays in clearing funds tie up working capital:
Illustrative Calculation
- →Payment: $100,000
- →Settlement delay: 4 business days
- →Annual cost of capital: 8% (approximate SME borrowing rate in Brazil, 2025)
Daily capital cost: $100,000 × 8% ÷ 252 ≈ $32/day 4-day delay cost: $32 × 4 ≈ $127
At 12 payments per month, the working capital cost = ~$1,500/month → ~$18,000/year
Insight: Even small delays accumulate into substantial financial costs.
This is a rough model. Actual cost depends on your cost of capital, average order value, and payment frequency. The point is that settlement delay is a finance cost, not merely an operational inconvenience.
- →Administrative and Treasury Costs – The Overlooked Cost
Managing USD procurement requires team effort:
- →5–10 hours/month for 10–15 supplier payments
- →Finance team cost: $30–$60/hour
- →Administrative overhead: $150–$600/month
Total Cost Summary (illustrative, $100,000/month supplier payment)
| Cost Component | Low Estimate | High Estimate |
|---|---|---|
| FX spreads (dual conversion) | $2,000 | $5,000 |
| Transaction & intermediary fees | $200 | $600 |
| Working capital cost of delays | $400 | $1,500 |
| Administrative overhead | $150 | $600 |
| Total | $2,750 | $7,700 |
These are modelling estimates, not audited benchmarks. Use them as a framework for calculating your own costs.
USD Dependency: Why It Creates Friction and What It Actually Costs
The US Dollar often acts as the default intermediary currency in Latin America–Asia trade. While convenient for global settlement, this creates three main operational challenges for importers.
- →Structural Double Conversion
Most Latin American importers do not hold significant USD balances, so every payment typically involves three steps:
- →Convert local currency (BRL, MXN, CLP) to USD → incurs FX spread
- →Transfer USD internationally → incurs bank/intermediary fees and delays
- →Supplier converts USD to local currency (CNY, VND) → cost often embedded in supplier pricing
Insight: Each step adds cost and friction. Eliminating one or more steps (e.g., direct local-to-CNY payment) can reduce total cost and simplify procurement.
- →Currency Volatility Amplifies Procurement Costs
Fluctuations in local currency vs. USD can increase the importer's cost even if the supplier’s price remains constant.
Illustrative Example:
| Scenario | BRL/USD Rate | USD Cost (CNY 650,000 order) | BRL Cost | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strong BRL | 4.80 | $90,277 | R$433,333 | – |
| Weak BRL | 5.60 | $90,277 | R$505,551 | R$72,218 (~16.7%) |
Note: The supplier price did not change; the importer’s cost increased purely due to currency depreciation.
- →USD Sourcing Delays
During periods of market stress or FX volatility, acquiring USD at competitive rates can take 1–3 business days before the international transfer even begins.
- →This delay affects inventory replenishment and supplier relationship management.
- →SMEs without large USD holdings are especially vulnerable to these timing issues.
Tip for Buyers: Consider platforms that support direct local-to-supplier currency payments or pre-funded USD accounts to reduce FX spreads and settlement delays.
Regulatory and Compliance Landscape: Brazil, Mexico, and Chile
Understanding local FX and payment regulations is critical before selecting a cross-border payment provider.
4.1 Brazil
Governing Framework: Brazilian Central Bank (BCB); Foreign Exchange Law No. 14,286/2021 (effective February 2022)
Key Requirements for Importers:
| Requirement | Detail |
|---|---|
| FX registration | All FX transactions above BRL 100,000 must be registered in SISBACEN (BCB system) |
| Commercial documentation | Valid Commercial Invoice, Bill of Lading / Airway Bill, and Import Declaration (DI)required |
| Authorized FX institutions | FX conversions must be done via BCB-authorized banks or licensed payment companies |
| Reporting threshold | Transactions above USD 10,000 equivalent require beneficial owner identification |
| Anti-money laundering | AML Law No. 9,613/1998 applies; KYC required for business customers |
Law No. 14,286/2021 Updates:
- →Simplified FX regulations
- →Allowed non-bank institutions to operate as FX dealers if BCB-authorized
- →Enabled BRL-denominated international trade settlements
- →Reduced documentation for smaller transactions
Practical Implication: Non-bank platforms (e.g., XTransfer) can legally conduct FX operations, but importers must ensure complete commercial documentation.
4.2 Mexico
Governing Framework: Banco de México (Banxico); Ley para la Transparencia y Ordenamiento de los Servicios Financieros; AML framework under SHCP/UIF and CNBV supervision
Key Requirements for Importers:
| Requirement | Detail |
|---|---|
| FX authorization | Conducted through Banxico-authorized intermediaries (banks or casas de cambio) |
| Import documentation | Commercial Invoice, Pedimento de Importación (customs declaration), CURP/RFC identification |
| Reporting threshold | Cash > MXN 600 equivalent in USD requires SAT reporting; electronic transfers have separate thresholds |
| SPEI system | Domestic real-time payment system; used to fund international payment platforms locally |
| FATF compliance | AML/CFT actively enforced by CNBV |
Key Consideration: Peso has been relatively stable, but USD/MXN volatility affects procurement costs. Cross-border transfers must always be accompanied by proper commercial documentation.
4.3 Chile
Governing Framework: Banco Central de Chile; Ley Orgánica Constitucional del Banco Central; Compendio de Normas de Cambios Internacionales (CNCI)
Key Requirements for Importers:
| Requirement | Detail |
|---|---|
| FX registration | Transactions > USD 10,000 must be reported under Capítulo XII |
| Formal exchange market | Imports > USD 10,000 must go through Mercado Cambiario Formal (MCF)—authorized banks/institutions |
| Commercial documentation | Commercial Invoice and DUS (customs documentation) required |
| Capital controls | Chile maintains open capital account, no repatriation restrictions |
| CLP settlement | CLP-denominated settlements allowed under specific conditions |
Key Consideration:
- →Chile’s currency (CLP) is commodity-linked, so CLP/USD volatility affects import costs.
- →Open capital account simplifies cross-border payments compared to Brazil/Mexico.
- →Capítulo XII reporting must be observed for large transactions.
4.4 Asian Counterpart Requirements
China (CNY payments)
China’s cross-border payment environment is governed by the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) and supporting banking regulations.
- →Inbound foreign currency payments to Chinese suppliers are subject to SAFE regulatory oversight and bank-level compliance checks
- →Suppliers are required to declare incoming foreign currency receipts through their receiving banks
- →Trade payments must be supported by valid commercial documentation (e.g., invoices, contracts, shipping documents); inconsistencies may trigger additional bank or SAFE review
- →CNY cross-border settlement is supported via China’s CIPS (Cross-Border Interbank Payment System), which operates alongside existing correspondent banking networks
Practical implication: While cross-border CNY settlement is increasingly supported, actual processing still depends on supplier bank readiness and documentation quality.
Vietnam (VND payments)
Vietnam’s foreign exchange system is regulated by the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV), with a controlled but gradually liberalizing FX framework.
- →Foreign currency (primarily USD) payments to Vietnamese suppliers are widely accepted and remain the dominant settlement standard for exports
- →FX conversion and settlement rules are governed by SBV regulations and commercial banking compliance requirements
- →Cross-border payment infrastructure is evolving, and some regional platforms are expanding local-currency payout capabilities, although adoption remains uneven across banks and industries
- →For Chinese-invested factories in Vietnam, CNY settlement is becoming an increasingly viable alternative to USD to mitigate dual-conversion risks.
Practical implication: USD remains the primary working currency for most Vietnam export transactions, while local currency settlement is still developing and not yet uniformly supported.
4.5 Practical Compliance Checklist by Market
| Requirement | Brazil | Mexico | Chile |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authorized FX institution required | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Commercial invoice required | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Import customs documentation | ✓ (DI) | ✓ (Pedimento) | ✓ (DUS) |
| Reporting threshold | BRL 100K (SISBACEN) | MXN 600 equivalent (SAT) | USD 10K (CNCI) |
| Formal exchange market requirement | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ (above USD 10K) |
| Capital controls | Moderate | Low | Low |
| Non-bank FX operators permitted | ✓ (BCB-authorized) | ✓ (CNBV-authorized) | ✓ (BCB-Chile authorized) |
Why Traditional Banking Infrastructure Creates Friction
International payments processed through the correspondent banking system typically pass through a chain of intermediary banks, often involving US correspondent institutions for USD settlement.
- →Cost structure
According to the World Bank’s Remittance Prices Worldwide database, total cross-border remittance costs (including fees and FX spreads) can range from 6–12% in certain corridors (2023–2024 data), with some Latin America–Asia routes among the higher-cost segments. (Source: World Bank, Remittance Prices Worldwide, Q4 2024)
- →Settlement time
| Payment path | Typical settlement time |
|---|---|
| Latin American bank → US correspondent → Chinese bank | 3–5 business days (typical range) |
| Latin American bank → US correspondent → Vietnamese bank | 4–7 business days (typical range) |
| Modern B2B platforms (local or semi-local rails) | Same day to 2 business days |
Actual settlement time varies depending on compliance checks, cut-off times, time zones, and corridor infrastructure.
- →Transparency challenges
In traditional SWIFT correspondent banking chains, payments may pass through multiple intermediary banks. Depending on the fee arrangement (OUR / SHA / BEN), fees can be deducted along the way or charged separately.
As a result:
- →The final amount received may differ from the original transfer amount
- →Fee breakdown is not always fully visible in advance
- →This can create reconciliation issues and occasional short-payment disputes between counterparties
Modern systems (e.g., SWIFT gpi) improve tracking and transparency, but legacy routing structures can still introduce opacity.
Virtual Local Currency Accounts: How They Work and Their Limits
Modern B2B payment platforms provide an alternative to the traditional correspondent banking model:
How it works:
- →Importer funds account in local currency
(e.g., BRL via PIX, MXN via SPEI, CLP via local bank transfer)
- →Funds are held in a multi-currency digital wallet
- →These wallets are platform-managed and may not have the same regulatory protections as bank deposits.
- →Platform converts currency at an agreed rate
- →Supplier receives funds
- →In CNY, VND, or USD (depending on supplier preference)
Key advantages:
- →Eliminates the need to source USD before initiating the payment
- →Typically requires one FX conversion instead of two, reducing cost and complexity
- →Settlement speed depends on the platform’s local network, not the SWIFT correspondent chain
- →Transparent fees and rates at the point of transaction
- →Some platforms leverage inter-regional instant rails to reduce pay-in friction across Latin America
Important limitations to consider:
| Risk / Limitation | Details |
|---|---|
| Corridor coverage varies | Not all platforms support every currency pair; confirm BRL/MXN/CLP → CNY/VND before onboarding |
| Regulatory authorization required | Platforms must have FX and payment licenses in both sending and receiving countries, including AML compliance |
| FX rates may include a spread | Platforms set rates above mid-market; always compare actual quotes rather than advertised rates |
| Settlement speed claims | “Same-day” depends on cut-off times, compliance review, and corridor infrastructure; verify with the provider |
| Multi-currency wallets are not bank accounts | Funds may not enjoy full deposit protection or regulatory safeguards in all jurisdictions |
Platform Landscape: Who Operates on Latin America–Asia Payment Corridors
Several categories of providers operate across Latin America–Asia payment corridors. Each differs in infrastructure design, regulatory model, and corridor depth.
7.1 Provider Categories
Category A: Global B2B payment platforms with LatAm–Asia coverage
These platforms typically provide local collection accounts in Latin America and enable cross-border payouts into Asian markets via local banking rails or partner networks.
| Platform | LatAm Collection Coverage | Asia Payout Capability | Primary Focus |
|---|---|---|---|
| XTransfer | Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Chile, Argentina, Peru | China (CNY payout capability), Vietnam (VND rails), Malaysia (strong), Indonesia (strong), broader Asia | Export-oriented B2B trade |
| Airwallex | Brazil, Mexico | China, Vietnam, broader Asia | Multi-currency accounts, digital businesses |
| Nium | Select Latin American markets | Broad Asia coverage via global network | Enterprise B2B payments infrastructure |
| PingPong | Brazil, Mexico | China (strong), Vietnam | Cross-border e-commerce and trade |
Coverage based on publicly available platform documentation (latest available information). Corridor availability should be verified directly with providers.
Category B: Latin America–specialized payment infrastructure
These providers primarily focus on enabling local payment collection and domestic rails within Latin America, with Asia payouts typically enabled through partner networks or limited corridors.
| Platform | Focus Area | Asia Payout Capability |
|---|---|---|
| dLocal | Deep LatAm local payment method coverage | Primarily via partner networks in select corridors |
| EBANX | Brazil and Mexico payment processing | Limited direct Asia payout capability |
| Pagsmile | Brazil-focused local payments | Limited direct Asia payout capability |
Category C: Traditional banks with international desks
Traditional correspondent banking channels remain relevant for high-value transactions (often $500K+), where credit lines, relationship banking, and regulatory certainty are prioritized over speed and cost efficiency.
7.2 Evaluation Framework for Provider Comparison
Rather than focusing on specific vendors, providers can be assessed using the following dimensions:
| Criterion | Evaluation Question |
|---|---|
| Regulatory licensing | Is the provider authorized for FX and payment services in both sending and receiving jurisdictions (e.g., BCB Brazil, CMF Chile, CNBV Mexico)? |
| Corridor coverage | Does it support your required currency pair (e.g., BRL → CNY, MXN → VND) via direct or partner rails? |
| FX transparency | Are FX rates quoted with explicit spreads over mid-market, and can rates be locked prior to execution? |
| Settlement performance | What is the documented SLA for the specific corridor, and is it contractually enforceable? |
| Compliance infrastructure | How are trade documents (invoices, bills of lading) verified, and what is the compliance review turnaround time? |
| Reconciliation capability | Does the platform support automated reconciliation, accounting integrations, and structured remittance data? |
| Regulatory track record | What is the provider’s public regulatory compliance history across operating jurisdictions? |
Real-World Scenario: Importing Industrial Components from Shenzhen
Business profile: Brazilian SME importing industrial components from a Shenzhen manufacturer.
Order value: $100,000 USD
Payment frequency: Monthly
Assumption: FX rates approximated to model costs; actual rates may vary.
- →Traditional Flow (SWIFT Correspondent Banking)
| Step | Action | Cost | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Convert BRL → USD at local bank | 2.0%–3.5% FX spread ≈ $2,000–$3,500 | Same day |
| 2 | SWIFT transfer initiated | $45–$65 bank fee | Day 1 |
| 3 | US correspondent bank routing | $15–$35 intermediary fee (deducted in transit) | Day 2–3 |
| 4 | Chinese correspondent bank | $10–$20 additional fee possible | Day 3–4 |
| 5 | Supplier receives CNY | USD→CNY conversion 0.5%–1.0% ≈ $500–$1,000 | Day 4–6 |
| Total | $2,570–$4,620 | 4–6 business days |
Indicative range; actual settlement depends on cut-off times, compliance checks, and corridor infrastructure.
- →Modern Platform Flow (Virtual Local Currency Account)
| Step | Action | Cost | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fund platform account via PIX (BRL) | Minimal (~R$0–5) | Minutes |
| 2 | Platform converts BRL → CNY | 0.5%–1.5% FX spread ≈ $500–$1,500 | Same day |
| 3 | Platform routes funds to Chinese supplier | Flat fee typically $10–$50, or included in spread | Day 1–2 |
| 4 | Supplier receives CNY | No additional conversion required | Day 1–2 |
| Total | $510–$1,550 | 1–2 business days |
Figures indicative; actual costs vary by platform, transaction size, and market conditions.
- →Comparison Summary
| Metric | Traditional (SWIFT) | Modern Platform | Potential Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| FX & fee cost | $2,570–$4,620 | $510–$1,550 | $1,020–$3,070 saved |
| Settlement time | 4–6 business days | 1–2 business days | 2–4 days faster |
| Cost transparency | Post-settlement | At transaction point | Higher predictability |
| Working capital impact | — | Earlier supplier payment can improve cash flow | Potentially better terms |
⚠️ Important caveat: Modelled estimates based on publicly available data. Obtain firm quotes from banks and platform providers for precise comparison.
Procurement Payment Checklist (Pre-Execution)
Use this checklist before initiating an international supplier payment.
Regulatory & Compliance
- ✓Confirm your payment provider is authorized to conduct FX operations in your country (BCB, CNBV, or BCB-Chile authorization)
- ✓Prepare commercial invoice, import customs documentation (DI/Pedimento/DUS), and supplier information
- ✓Verify your transaction falls within or above reporting thresholds (and comply accordingly)
- ✓Confirm supplier's bank details, currency preference, and SWIFT/CIPS routing information
Cost evaluation
- ✓Obtain a firm FX quote (not indicative rate) before execution
- ✓Compare quoted FX rate vs. mid-market rate to determine effective spread
- ✓Confirm all fees (platform, intermediary, recipient bank fees) before executing
- ✓Calculate total cost of the transaction, not just the headline rate
Operational
- ✓Confirm settlement timeline for your specific corridor (not general platform claims)
- ✓Verify supported funding options (BRL via PIX, MXN via SPEI, CLP via local transfer)
- ✓Check reconciliation data availability (invoice matching, accounting export formats)
Supplier relationship
- ✓Confirm supplier's preferred settlement currency (CNY, VND, or USD etc)
- ✓Confirm supplier's bank is reachable via your chosen payment provider's network
- ✓Provide supplier with payment confirmation and expected receipt date
Implications for Importers by Market
Brazil
Brazil benefits from the widespread adoption of PIX, which enables instant, low-cost domestic funding for cross-border payment platforms. The 2022 FX regulatory reform (Law No. 14,286/2021) broadened the FX framework and increased participation of non-bank institutions under Central Bank of Brazil (BCB) supervision.
Key considerations for Brazilian importers:
- →Prioritize providers with BCB authorization for FX operations
- →Use PIX for near-instant, low-cost funding of payment accounts
- →Ensure compliance with SISBACEN reporting requirements as required by banks and transaction structure
- →Evaluate platforms offering direct BRL → CNY conversion to reduce reliance on USD intermediation
Mexico
Mexico’s SPEI system provides real-time domestic funding rails that support efficient onboarding for cross-border payment platforms. FX and payment activities are primarily overseen by Banco de México and CNBV depending on service structure.
Key considerations for Mexican importers:
- →Confirm CNBV and Banco de México oversight of the provider
- →Use SPEI for fast, low-cost domestic funding
- →Monitor MXN volatility against USD and evaluate hedging strategies for large-volume imports
- →Verify applicable SAT reporting and tax documentation requirements
Chile
Chile operates under an open capital account framework, which simplifies cross-border payments relative to other Latin American markets. However, certain transactions may require processing through the Formal Exchange Market depending on size and structure, under CMF Chile oversight.
Key considerations for Chilean importers:
- →Confirm CMF Chile regulatory compliance of the payment provider
- →Assess whether transactions require routing through the Formal Exchange Market
- →Evaluate hedging strategies given CLP volatility and commodity exposure
- →Ensure compliance with reporting requirements for cross-border FX transactions (e.g., documentation thresholds)
Frequently Asked Questions
In many cases, yes—if you use a payment platform that supports local currency funding and direct settlement in CNY or VND.
These platforms typically collect funds in local currency (e.g., BRL, MXN, or CLP) and convert directly into the supplier’s settlement currency via cross-border payment rails. Availability depends on the platform’s corridor coverage and regulatory authorization in your jurisdiction, so both should be verified before onboarding.
On a $100,000 transaction, eliminating one FX conversion step can potentially save approximately $500–$3,000, depending on spread differences between:
- →Traditional dual conversion (local → USD → CNY)
- →Direct conversion (local → CNY)
The actual saving varies significantly by provider, transaction size, and market conditions. To obtain an accurate estimate, it is recommended to request live quotes from both a traditional bank and a payment platform on the same day.
Reporting requirements vary by country and transaction structure:
- →Brazil: Some transactions may require reporting via SISBACEN depending on type and bank obligations
- →Mexico: Certain transactions may trigger SAT reporting or enhanced tax documentation requirements
- →Chile: Some cross-border transactions may need to be processed through the Formal Exchange Market depending on size and structure
In all cases, the payment provider can assist with documentation, but compliance responsibility remains with the importing business. Consult a local tax or legal advisor for specific requirements.
At minimum:
- →Commercial invoice
- →Import customs documentation (DI in Brazil, Pedimento in Mexico, DUS in Chile)
- →Supplier bank details
For higher-value transactions, additional documents such as purchase orders, bills of lading/airway bills, and proof of underlying trade relationship may be required.
Chinese receiving banks may also request supporting documentation for import compliance purposes (including SAFE-related documentation where applicable).
No. In most jurisdictions, funds held in non-bank payment platform wallets do not carry the same deposit insurance protections as bank accounts.
Regulatory protections depend on the provider’s licensing structure and fund safeguarding arrangements. Before holding significant balances, it is important to understand how client funds are segregated and protected.
Authorization should be verified through the relevant financial regulator or central bank in your jurisdiction.
Common reference points include:
- →Central Bank of Brazil (BCB)
- →National Banking and Securities Commission (CNBV, Mexico)
- →Central Bank / Financial Market Commission (Chile)
You may also request formal licensing documentation directly from the provider if it is not publicly listed
Key evaluation criteria include:
- →Regulatory authorization in your operating jurisdiction
- →Corridor coverage (specific currency pairs and destination countries)
- →FX transparency (mid-market rate + explicit spread, quoted before execution)
- →Settlement SLA (documented and corridor-specific)
- →Compliance infrastructure (document handling and review timelines)
- →Reconciliation capabilities (ERP/accounting integration, remittance data quality)
- →Total cost structure (all-in pricing vs headline FX rates)
It is recommended to run pilot transactions with shortlisted providers before committing to a primary payment partner.
References
-
ECLAC / Chinese Ministry of CommerceChina–Latin America bilateral trade statistics, 2024
-
Brazilian Ministry of Development, Industry, Trade and Services (MDIC)Brazil import data by origin country, 2024
-
Trading EconomicsBrazil imports from Vietnam, 2024
-
-
Banco Central do Brasil (BCB)Foreign Exchange Law No. 14,286/2021; BCB Circular 3,691; Pesquisa de Meios de Pagamento 2024
-
Banco de México (Banxico)FX regulatory framework and authorized intermediary guidelines
-
Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores (CNBV)Authorized institution register and AML/CFT framework, Mexico
-
Banco Central de ChileCompendio de Normas de Cambios Internacionales (CNCI); Capítulo XII reporting requirements
-
State Administration of Foreign Exchange, China (SAFE)Cross-border payment and FX settlement regulations
-
State Bank of Vietnam (SBV)Foreign currency payment regulations for export transactions
-
-
-
-
-
