A recap of the 2026 BAFT International Trade and Payments Conference
The 2026 BAFT International Trade and Payments Conference, held February 3-5 in Jersey City, USA, brought together industry professionals and thought leaders from all corners of these interconnected domains to share ideas and network across the river from the city that never sleeps.
Overall, the theme of the conference seemed to be one of an industry adapting to rapid change. Geopolitical tension and tariff uncertainty are certainly hot topics in the room, but so were instant payments, always-on settlement, and the impact that both will have on liquidity and treasury. At the same time, discussions around digital assets, AI, and financial crime made attendees simultaneously excited and scared for the world that lies ahead.
Taken together, the discussions showed an industry trying to reconcile macro uncertainty on the outside and relentless technological change on the inside.
The G20 Global Roadmap: From Commitments to Real-World Change
There is still some distance between the G20’s targets and the reality that banks and clients face when it comes to cross-border payments. While progress has been made, the panel’s view was that the 2027 goals will be difficult to meet in full because the remaining barriers are with the “last mile”, where delays are most visible to end clients and least consistent across corridors.
The panel argued that the most meaningful gains in the next year are likely to come from stronger adherence to existing standards (like ISO 20022) rather than new systems. Richer data can reduce friction, but only if fields and market practices are harmonised across jurisdictions.
Even if the G20 goals are met, the panel does not expect stablecoins to disappear because they offer different features, including programmability and 24/7 settlement, and they will likely coexist with traditional rails as payments and the landscape they sit in continue to diversify.
Redrawing the Global Map: How Geopolitics Is Reshaping Trade Routes
Geopolitical tension, the undeniable elephant in the trade room over the past year, is beginning to have a tangible impact on real-world business in the form of reshaped trade routes. And the disruption extends beyond the immediate point of disturbance.
When security risks affect corridors such as the Red Sea, the impact is rarely limited to that stretch of water, but extends across multiple lanes because global shipping operates as an interconnected system.
Often, it is the corporate decision makers, guided by these geopolitical pressures, that determine where and how goods will eventually move. For example, combined sea and overland routes between the Gulf and the Eastern Mediterranean are starting to be used as alternatives to traditional shipping lanes.
These shifts carry direct implications for the banks involved in those transactions. Indeed, supporting an established supply chain differs from supporting a reconfigured one, particularly where new counterparties and jurisdictions are involved.
For institutions in the room, the takeaway was that corridor insight is becoming central to trade banking strategy. Understanding where trade is moving and how those movements alter risk and liquidity dynamics is increasingly necessary for pricing, capital allocation, and client support in a more fragmented environment.
Payments & Trade on the Blockchain Frontier: Stablecoins, Tokenization and Liquidity in the GENIUS Era
While the technology behind stablecoins and tokenised deposits has begun attracting more attention again, institutions are increasingly focusing on solving core client problems, particularly in areas such as cross-border payments and liquidity management.
These two technologically driven forms of payments differ from each other and have their own respective benefits and drawbacks. Stablecoins can be programmed and transferred at all hours of the day and night, making them highly flexible and adaptable to the emerging applications of today’s always-on digital world. Tokenised deposits, on the other hand, are a more familiar entry point for regulated institutions seeking to extend their existing deposit models into digital environments. Regulatory developments, including frameworks such as the GENIUS Act, are central to shaping the path to widespread adoption that these will be able to take.
The overall takeaway was that digital money models are advancing, but adoption will depend on clear use cases, regulatory clarity, and the ability to move into scalable solutions that fit within existing treasury and payments operations.
Intelligent Agents, Intelligent Risks: The Next Frontier of AI in Payments
It has certainly been hard to miss all the conversations around the impact that AI will have on the industry. This panel specifically focused on the role of Agentic AI and the changes that it may bring for international payments.
It is important to remember that AI does not fix broken processes. Firms experimenting with agent-based models are finding that their success or failure depends less on the sophistication of the model itself and more on the underlying data structure and governance that allow humans to intervene when necessary. Participants noted that data consolidation across legacy platforms remains one of the biggest barriers to scaling meaningful AI adoption.
If viewers left this session with one takeaway, it was that intelligent agents are beginning to reshape payments models, but that the pace and shape of subsequent progress will depend on design and governance choices that are made today. The technology can accelerate decision-making, but without strong controls, it can accelerate mistakes just as quickly.
Trends in Proliferation Financing
In today’s increasingly volatile geopolitical environment, the risks associated with proliferation financing are more relevant than they have ever been. Proliferation financing concerns the funding of weapons of mass destruction and dual-use goods. Typically, it involves transactions that are structured to appear routine while camouflaging the fact that they are really supporting the movement or payment of controlled components.
Trade-based methods are particularly useful for criminals because they can allow large values to move within legitimate commercial flows. Instruments such as standby letters of credit, layered invoicing, mislabelled goods, and circuitous routing can obscure the true purpose of a nefarious transition behind the facade of a seemingly ordinary trade activity.
Since institutions are being asked to detect risks that often sit deep within trade documentation, effectively mitigating the risks of proliferation financing requires having access to reliable reference sources and a risk-based framework that integrates AML and counterterrorist financing with proliferation financing.
Decision makers would be wise to heed the warning that when it comes to proliferation financing, technology is not a silver bullet. While digital tools can assist with detection, they are ill suited to replace the informed judgment of seasoned trade professionals (employing what many would refer to as the ‘sniff test’). In a domain where mistakes can lead to dangerous goods entering the hands of dangerous people, maintaining robust processes and training is more critical than ever.