LCQ12: Enhancement of cross-boundary remittance arrangements
************************************************************
Question:
There are views pointing out that the demand for cross-boundary remittances between Hong Kong and the Mainland is increasing, yet restrictions on remittance limits and channel regulation remain imperfect. Regarding the enhancement of cross-boundary remittance arrangements, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it has compiled statistics on (i) the number of agencies providing cross-boundary remittance services between Hong Kong and the Mainland, (ii) the total amount of remittance involved, and (iii) the total amount of banks' revenue from the provision of the relevant cross-boundary remittance services under the Qualified Foreign Institutional Investor (QFII) scheme in each of the years between January 2016 and June 2025 (set out in Table 1);
Table 1
| Year | (i) | (ii) | (iii) |
| 2016 | |||
| …… | |||
| 2025 (January to June) |
(2) whether it has compiled statistics on the respective numbers of (a) transactions and (b) remittances in total (including telegraphic transfers) from Hong Kong to the Mainland (northbound) through banks by (i) individuals and (ii) institutions in each year from January 2019 to June 2025 (set out in Table 2);
Table 2
| Year | (i) | (ii) | ||
| (a) | (b) | (a) | (b) | |
| 2019 | ||||
| …… | ||||
| 2025 (January to June) |
||||
(3) whether the Government has requested that remittance agencies compile statistics on the use of remittances by individuals/institutions; if so, of the details (including a breakdown of the data on the use of remittances); if not, whether it will request that remittance agencies compile the relevant data and standardise the category of the relevant uses;
(4) whether it has compiled statistics on the remittance handling fee structure (including the actual fee charged for each remittance) of the various legal and authorised remittance agencies (such as banks) providing northbound cross-boundary remittance services in Hong Kong and the Mainland to individuals from January 2019 to June 2025, as well as the total amount of proceeds earned from remittance services provided by such agencies;
(5) as there are views that the Mainland's facilitative foreign exchange arrangement subject to an annual quota of US$50,000 per person has not been adjusted in light of market developments, whether the Government has plans to discuss with the State Administration of Foreign Exchange the adjustment of this quota against the background of the ongoing deepening of the financial co-operation between Hong Kong and the Mainland as well as the joint promotion of cross-boundary financial interconnection and mutual access in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area;
(6) whether the Government will consider encouraging banks to adjust their fees and charges for cross-boundary remittances and stepping up public education and publicity to encourage members of the public to remit money through legal and compliant channels; if not, of the reasons for that; and
(7) whether it will consider further regulating the operations of non-banking agencies involved in cross-boundary remittance services (e.g. money changers, etc), including requiring such agencies to transfer fund through legal and compliant channels, and setting up mechanisms on minimum capital requirements, risk reserve standards and daily operational monitoring; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
President,
In consultation with the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) and the Customs and Excise Department (C&ED), my reply to the seven parts of the question is as follows:
(1) Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors are foreign institutional investors approved by the China Securities Regulatory Commission to use funds from outside mainland China to invest in domestic securities and futures. We do not maintain relevant data of the number of agencies, the total amount of remittance, and the total amount of banks' revenue from the provision of the relevant cross-boundary remittance services.
(2) The figures of Renminbi (RMB) cross-boundary remittance transactions from Hong Kong to the Mainland (including individual and non-individual remitters) are as follows:
| RMB cross-boundary remittance transactions from Hong Kong to the Mainland (including individual and non-individual remitters) |
||
| Year | Number of counts (thousand) |
Transaction value (RMB trillion) |
| 2019 | 923 | 18.4 |
| 2020 | 1 054 | 22.3 |
| 2021 | 1 336 | 29.9 |
| 2022 | 1 597 | 35.5 |
| 2023 | 2 488 | 53.6 |
| 2024 | 3 299 | 100.7 |
| 2025 (January to June) | 1 883 | 42.6 |
(3) As the regulator of banks in Hong Kong, the HKMA has been collecting different scope of data from banks, for the purpose of conducting risk assessments and continuous monitoring on banks' business.
In respect of RMB remittance business of banks in Hong Kong, besides the statistics on cross-boundary remittance transactions set out above, the HKMA also regularly releases banks' RMB remittance for trade settlement business, with relevant data as below:
| Year | Total remittances for RMB cross-border trade settlement (RMB billion) |
| 2019 | 5,376.4 |
| 2020 | 6,324.1 |
| 2021 | 7,083.6 |
| 2022 | 9,337.9 |
| 2023 | 11,676.1 |
| 2024 | 15,184.6 |
| 2025 (January to June) | 7,334.7 |
(4) There are different scales and operational models of the cross-boundary payment services across banks. Individual banks would set their fee structure and level for the services according to the bank's own circumstances as a commercial decision of the banks. Nonetheless, banks should comply with the relevant requirements of the Code of Banking Practice when providing cross-boundary payment services. These include, among other things, providing for customers details of the services they offer, such as a basic description of the service; the basis on which exchange rates will be applied; details of any commission or charges payable by customers to the bank; and other commission or charges levied by correspondent banks outside Hong Kong (if available). By maintaining transparency of the fees charged by banks in providing cross-boundary payment services, the HKMA hopes to enhance competition in this market segment.
As for money service operators, since their business models and operational circumstances vary, there is no uniform fee structure for remittance services across the industry.
(5) According to the prevailing Mainland regulations, Hong Kong residents can in general remit funds to the Mainland through banks for spending or expenses related to travel, business trips, study abroad, daily life, and family support, etc. Within this scope, if the remittances are made in RMB, Hong Kong residents can transfer funds to their same-name bank accounts on the Mainland, subject to a daily limit of RMB80,000, under the existing arrangements. If the remittances are made in non-RMB currencies (including HKD), there is a facilitative arrangement available for individual recipients, subject to an annual quota equivalent to USD50,000. If the recipients can provide supporting documents to confirm genuineness of the remittances, the policy also allows Hong Kong residents to make cross-boundary remittances to the Mainland without utilising the aforementioned limits.
With the efforts of financial regulators and the industry in Hong Kong and the Mainland in recent years, we have introduced various facilitative arrangements on personal cross-boundary remittance. In early 2024, facilitation arrangements for remittances were introduced to facilitate Hong Kong residents purchasing properties in the Mainland cities of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area to remit funds related to property purchases to the Mainland through the banking system. The HKMA and the People's Bank of China launched Payment Connect on June 22 this year. Hong Kong residents can make real-time and small-value cross-boundary remittances at participating institutions in Hong Kong via Faster Payment System.
We notice that some citizens wish for further enhancement to cross-boundary remittance arrangements to facilitate cross-boundary transactions relating to their everyday life on the Mainland, for example, transportation and living, medical services, retirement and elderly care, etc. We are engaging with Mainland authorities to explore further facilitative measures under different scenarios.
(6) In respect of public education, the HKMA released a set of FAQs on the website at the beginning of this year, explaining the current Mainland policy arrangements under different scenarios on cross-boundary remittance, and introducing the remittance and payment products provided by banks and stored value payment facilities in Hong Kong and the Mainland. Subsequently the HKMA held an industry briefing with banks to discuss the implementation arrangements, and reminded banks to ensure that frontline staff are aware of the relevant policy arrangements and handle clients' inquiries accordingly.
The C&ED places great importance on safeguarding consumer rights. It regularly promotes legally compliant money changing and remittance services through various channels, such as press releases and social media, and reminds consumers to consider a range of factors (including the delivery channels and reputation of the money service operators (MSOs)) in a comprehensive manner when choosing remittance services, as well as to be aware of the risks associated with remittance. The C&ED also actively provides promotional and educational talks to different communities. For example, between 2024 and June 2025, the C&ED conducted over 160 talks for over 21 000 workers newly arrived in Hong Kong under the Enhanced Supplementary Labour Scheme, educating them on points to note when using remittance services.
(7) The Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance (Cap. 615) (AMLO) provides for a licensing regime for MSOs, empowering the C&ED to supervise their compliance.
Under the current licensing system, when applying for a licence or licence renewal, MSOs must meet the "fit and proper" test, and submit a business plan to the C&ED. This plan must explain their operating model and its rationale, clearly disclose the flow of funds and delivery channels, and demonstrate the existence of effective and appropriate anti-money laundering and terrorist financing measures and a daily operational monitoring mechanism. Through these licensing requirements, the C&ED can effectively assess and monitor the risks associated with MSOs of different operating models and sizes.
The C&ED attaches great importance to the compliance of the money service industry in providing remittance services and has consistently taken various measures to ensure that MSOs handle customer funds and complete relevant transactions in an appropriate manner. Among these, the C&ED has formulated the "Money Service Operators Licensing Guide" and the "Guideline on Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Financing of Terrorism" to ensure licensed MSOs comply with customer due diligence, record-keeping, proper handling of customer funds, and other licensing requirements. For MSOs with higher risk profiles (due to factors such as customer nature, products, services, transactions, or delivery channels), the C&ED may also impose specific licence conditions to strengthen supervision. The C&ED will continue to monitor market developments and review the requirements of the relevant regulatory mechanisms for the money service industry.
Ends/Wednesday, September 10, 2025
Issued at HKT 14:15
Issued at HKT 14:15
NNNN