SA: GoTyme challenges South African banks over instant-payment fees

South Africa has the infrastructure to transfer money within seconds, but the cost of accessing that speed remains a point of contention as banks continue charging customers for some instant payments.

Interbank transfers have traditionally attracted fees due to the costs associated with moving funds between financial institutions. However, PayShap, South Africa’s instant-payment rail, has been available to bank customers since 2023, raising questions about whether transactions completed almost immediately should continue to be treated as a premium banking service.

GoTyme Bank, the country’s digital-first challenger bank formerly known as TymeBank, is pushing back against the prevailing pricing model. The bank has offered customers free PayShap transfers of up to R5,000 ($309) since introducing the service in 2023 and is now urging other banks to adopt a similar approach.

“It’s not that the underlying payment infrastructure has no cost,” Marin Cundall, managing executive for digital experience at GoTyme Bank, told TechCabal. “Our position is that a modern, efficient bank can make a strategic choice not to pass every cost directly to the customer.”

According to Cundall, the cost of operating the payment rail is only one component of the broader pricing equation. Banks have different operating expenses, product designs and revenue models, meaning the fees charged to customers are not determined exclusively by the cost of processing a PayShap transaction.

She argued that GoTyme’s digital-first operating model gives it greater flexibility to absorb some costs instead of transferring them to customers.

“We see real-time payments as an essential part of everyday banking, not a premium service that customers should have to think twice about using,” Cundall said.

Small transactions bear the greatest impact

The debate over instant-payment charges is particularly significant for smaller transactions, where even a modest fee can account for a meaningful portion of the amount being transferred.

“A customer may accept a fee when transferring a large amount, but the same fee becomes difficult to justify when paying for lunch, settling a small service bill or sending a modest amount to a family member,” Cundall explained.

For small businesses, instant settlement also has direct operational benefits. A plumber can confirm payment before leaving a customer’s property, while a spaza shop can verify that funds have arrived before releasing goods.

Similarly, entrepreneurs who receive payments immediately can redirect the money into restocking inventory, paying workers or settling supplier obligations without waiting for funds to clear.

“We need to stop accepting settlement periods of up to three days as normal,” Cundall said. “When someone needs money for transport, food or electricity, two days is not a minor delay.”

Lessons from Pix and UPI

GoTyme is pointing to Brazil’s Pix and India’s Unified Payments Interface (UPI) as examples of how instant-payment systems can become embedded in everyday economic activity when they are treated as basic infrastructure rather than premium services.

Both platforms have helped normalise fast digital payments at national scale, supporting transactions across consumers, merchants and businesses.

Cheslyn Jacobs, CEO of GoTyme Bank, argued that charging customers to move their own money instantly is a policy and commercial decision rather than an unavoidable outcome of payment technology.

“When your economy can’t move money freely, you’re leaving growth on the table,” Jacobs said.

The argument is also supported by the broader economic benefits associated with faster payments. A 2026 World Bank report noted that instant-payment systems can improve liquidity by making funds available immediately, allowing businesses to deploy money sooner for inventory, wages and other operating expenses.

GoTyme urges evidence-based assessment

Despite its position, Cundall acknowledged that GoTyme has not yet quantified the impact of free instant payments on cash usage or the cash flow of small and medium-sized enterprises.

She cautioned against making claims that have not been independently measured.

“We should not claim that free Instant Payments have already reduced cash usage or improved SME cash flow by a particular percentage unless we have measured and verified that outcome,” she said.