BRICS nations are transitioning from conceptual discussions to practical steps in establishing a cross-border payments system, with a focus on faster payment links over the more complex and politically sensitive central bank digital currency bridges, signalling a shift towards more immediate financial integration.
India’s central bank governor has signalled that BRICS governments are now moving from broad rhetoric to formal work on a cross-border payment system, with two very different models under consideration: links between national fast-payment networks and a bridge between central bank digital currencies. Speaking at the FICCI-IBA Annual Banking Conference in Mumbai, Sanjay Malhotra framed the effort as a practical attempt to cut the cost and delay that still weigh on international remittances, rather than as a bid to replace existing reserve-currency arrangements. World Bank data show the global average cost of sending a $200 remittance remained well above the United Nations’ 3% target in early 2025, underlining the size of the problem the bloc is trying to address.
The Bank for International Settlements has previously described fast-payment-system interlinking as a way to make cross-border transfers quicker, cheaper and more inclusive without forcing countries to abandon their domestic rails. That approach is already visible in India’s ties with Singapore and the United Arab Emirates, and it fits a broader global pattern: more than 120 jurisdictions have either built or are planning fast-payment systems, according to a policy brief based on BIS work. The appeal is straightforward. Each country keeps control of its own payment infrastructure while agreeing on the standards needed to let money move across borders with less friction.
A CBDC bridge would be more ambitious. BRICS Magazine has noted that central banks in the grouping have been running pilots, but no member has launched a full-scale retail CBDC, which means a shared digital-currency rail would still require agreement on technical standards, governance and regulatory compatibility. The Alliance for Financial Inclusion has also highlighted a deeper policy question: what additional value a retail CBDC brings in countries where fast-payment systems already work well. That distinction matters for India, where the Unified Payments Interface has become a dominant digital-payments layer and has limited the domestic case for a separate retail digital currency.
The CBDC option also carries heavier political and compliance baggage. Any common ledger would have to reconcile different anti-money-laundering rules, data-protection standards and supervisory powers across BRICS members, some of which face sweeping Western sanctions. Those concerns help explain why a more modest, bilateral fast-payment model may be easier to expand corridor by corridor. It also helps explain why Malhotra was careful to separate the payments discussion from any wider de-dollarisation agenda, stressing infrastructure rather than geopolitics.
For India, the practical case for a fast-payment path is strong. The Reserve Bank of India has already built live links with several countries and is pursuing more, while also encouraging local-currency settlement through bilateral memoranda of understanding. Reuters-style reporting from the FICCI-IBA event said Malhotra’s remarks suggested that India sees the BRICS task force as a way to extend a model it already knows works. A decision is not imminent, but the conference marked a clearer point of departure: BRICS is now formally weighing whether to build a lighter, interoperable payments network or attempt something more complex and politically fraught.
Disclaimer: This article is intended to inform and educate, not to recommend or endorse any financial product, investment or strategy. Please consider your own financial circumstances and seek professional advice where appropriate before making financial decisions.
