| name | fintech-advisor |
| description | Strategic advisory for fintech founders on US/EU regulatory triggers, license-vs-partner, KYC/AML, and embedded finance. Use when scoping a fintech idea or regulatory exposure, or mentioning fintech, money transmitter, neobank, KYC, or PSD2.
|
| license | MIT + Commons Clause |
| metadata | {"version":"1.0.0","author":"borghei","category":"vertical-advisors","domain":"fintech","updated":"2026-05-04T00:00:00.000Z","python-tools":"regulatory_trigger_checker.py","tech-stack":"fintech, banking, payments"} |
Fintech Advisor
Strategic frameworks for fintech founders, operators, and product leaders. Knowledge-heavy by design — the right answer in fintech is usually a regulatory and economic judgment, not a calculation.
Disclaimer: This skill provides frameworks and orientation. It is not legal, regulatory, securities, tax, or investment advice. Every fintech business needs licensed legal counsel. Use this skill to organize internal thinking; engage specialist counsel for binding decisions.
Table of Contents
Keywords
fintech, payments, banking, neobank, lending, money transmitter, KYC, AML, PSD2, open banking, BaaS, banking-as-a-service, embedded finance, card issuing, ACH, SEPA, stablecoin, crypto, broker-dealer, RIA, regulation, compliance
Quick Start
Initial Regulatory Triage in 10 Minutes
- Write a 1-paragraph description of what your fintech does (who pays whom, in what form, who holds the funds)
- Run
python scripts/regulatory_trigger_checker.py business_description.txt
- Use the output as input to a conversation with a fintech-licensed lawyer — never as the conclusion
License vs. Partner Decision
- Read
references/license_vs_partner_playbook.md
- For each capability you need (hold funds, issue cards, originate loans, send payments), decide: get a license, or partner with a licensed entity (BaaS, sponsor bank)
- Most early-stage fintechs partner. License only if the unit economics or moat absolutely require it.
Core Workflows
Workflow 1: Regulatory Exposure Scoping
Goal: Understand which US / EU regulatory regimes a proposed fintech business model triggers, before committing to architecture.
Steps:
- Write a clear business description: who pays whom, what is held by whom, where the entity operates
- Run the trigger checker for a quick orientation
- Map each trigger to the relevant regulator (FinCEN, OCC, state banking commissioners, SEC, CFPB, FCA, BaFin, ACPR)
- Engage specialist counsel before designing infrastructure
- Document the regulatory architecture as part of the company's compliance file
Time Estimate: 4-8 weeks of legal scoping for a meaningful new build.
Workflow 2: License vs. Partner
Goal: Decide whether to get the regulated capability yourself, or buy it from a partner.
Steps:
- List capabilities needed: KYC/identity, custody, issuing, acquiring, lending, FX, deposit-taking
- For each, score on the 4-axis grid in
license_vs_partner_playbook.md: cost, time, control, economics
- Pick partners only where the regulator-of-record relationship can survive partner failure
- Document fallback plans if the partner is ever rate-limited, deprecates, or fails
Time Estimate: 6-12 weeks for major capability decisions.
Workflow 3: KYC/AML Program Design
Goal: Build a KYC/AML program that satisfies regulators and doesn't kill conversion.
Steps:
- Read
references/kyc_aml_basics.md
- Design tiered KYC: minimal at signup, enhanced when usage patterns trigger thresholds
- Pick risk-scoring vendor (Alloy, Sardine, Persona, Onfido) and write integration plan
- Establish ongoing monitoring: transaction monitoring rules, periodic refresh, sanctions / PEP screening
- Engage MLRO (Money Laundering Reporting Officer) before going live
Time Estimate: 8-16 weeks for first-time program design.
Tools
regulatory_trigger_checker.py
Scans a business description for keywords and patterns that map to regulatory regimes in the US and EU. Output is a list of candidate triggers, not a legal opinion.
python scripts/regulatory_trigger_checker.py business_description.txt
python scripts/regulatory_trigger_checker.py business_description.txt --json
Triggers detected:
- Money transmission (state-by-state US, e-money/payment institution EU)
- Lending (CFPB, state lending licenses, EU consumer credit)
- Securities (SEC broker-dealer, RIA, EU MiFID)
- Banking / deposit-taking (OCC, FDIC, EU credit institution)
- Payment services (PSD2 in EU, FCA in UK)
- Cryptocurrency (FinCEN MSB, NYDFS BitLicense, MiCA in EU)
- Custody of customer assets
Reference Guides
references/regulatory_landscape.md — Map of US and EU fintech regulators, what each covers, common trigger patterns
references/license_vs_partner_playbook.md — When to get a license, when to partner, partner failure planning
references/kyc_aml_basics.md — KYC tiers, risk-based monitoring, MLRO role, common pitfalls
references/embedded_finance_patterns.md — BaaS architecture, distribution-led fintech, B2B2C patterns
Templates
assets/regulatory_architecture_template.md — Document template for capturing regulatory decisions and partner choices
Best Practices
- Engage fintech-specialist counsel from day one. General-purpose corporate lawyers will miss regulatory triggers. The cost of specialist counsel up front is a fraction of the cost of a regulatory mistake.
- Don't hide behind partners. Even with a BaaS provider, your customers see your brand and the regulator may look through to you. Plan for partner failure.
- State-by-state US is real. Money transmitter laws are state-level — 49 different licenses possible. Most fintechs partner to avoid this.
- Sanctions are absolute. A $100 OFAC violation can cost $10M. Sanctions screening is non-negotiable.
- Treat compliance as product. Frictionless KYC and clear customer comms about why you're asking for documents are a competitive advantage.
Integration Points
- Pairs with
c-level-advisor/cs-fundraising-advisor — investors expect a clear regulatory architecture
- Pairs with
engineering/cs-security-engineer — fintech security goes beyond standard SaaS
- Pairs with
legal/ skills for contract / partner agreements
- Pairs with
business-growth/pricing-strategy — fintech pricing has unusual constraints (interchange, FX spread, float)