Payment collections as a treasury challenge

The growing diversity of payment methods

This is particularly true for companies with many end customers across different countries and sales channels. For online retailers, for example, optimising direct debits is becoming an even greater priority. However, the issue is complex.

Although instant payment regulations have laid the groundwork for the wider adoption of real-time transactions, meaning that, in theory, payments could be received within seconds and refunds processed immediately. In practice, however, customers decide on the payment method in online retail. Merchants are under pressure to prevent abandoned carts and drive conversions. To this end, they offer a wide range of payment methods, from traditional bank transfers and direct debits to cards, invoices and digital wallets. As internationalisation increases, so does the complexity, as different regulatory frameworks apply in many European markets. Furthermore, local payment methods such as Bancotact in Belgium, Paylib in France, bizum in Spain and Swish in Sweden are firmly established and taken for granted by customers in these countries.

Automation and customisation

For treasury teams, this diversity poses a huge challenge when it comes to managing and monitoring incoming payments. The more payment methods in use, the more fragmented processes, data formats and payment flows become. Incoming payments arrive via different channels. B2C models often allow for standardised agreements and automated reminders. However, challenges such as data quality, partial payments, chargebacks or late incoming payments hinder automation. Furthermore, the multitude of different payment methods entails significant administrative effort and costs for the company – both in the initial phase when integrating APIs and during processing and fraud prevention. In the B2B sector, on the other hand, manual processes and individually negotiable payment terms and methods often still dominate. Due to the generally high volumes, many companies prefer to manually monitor their outgoing payments. This also increases the reconciliation and monitoring workload on the recipient’s side. Payment terms have a direct impact on liquidity and working capital. A typical example: suppliers receive their money immediately, but customers pay their invoices much later. This asymmetry complicates liquidity planning and increases the demands on forecasting and cash management.

Control remains crucial

Technology helps, but control remains central. External factors such as sanctions or geopolitical tensions place greater demands on audit processes and transparency. Partners offering appropriate solutions should provide companies with comprehensive support in this area to mitigate risks, reduce administrative burden, provide real-time data, and drive end-to-end automation. For companies, the focus is not on individual payment methods, but on the ability to monitor cash flows holistically, identify risks at an early stage and adapt processes flexibly. For corporate treasurers, this means viewing direct debits not in isolation, but as an integral part of treasury management.

This article was first published in the Treasury Bulletin magazine in April 2026.

Authors

Marlen Muschter, Director Transaction Services Sales

Christian Voitl, Vice President Transaction Services Products