Someone based in New York has the power to send a 100-gigabyte photo album to their Californian friend in seconds. If they want to give that person $50 to have some of those photos developed, they can zip it right over with a peer-to-peer app like Venmo. However, if that friend was based in Toronto, the sender may have to wait several days for the money to move and pay fees that rival the original payment. They could outrun that transfer in their car. Why, despite the technology we have today, is it still such a pain to send money to other countries?
This is a question nags at large businesses and private citizens alike. Not only do American companies have to deal with payment delays and fees when transferring money to vendors, but the exchange rate fluctuation that takes place during the waiting period can end up costing hundreds of dollars once the funds have settled. It’s not an easy process for anyone involved.
It’s not that there are limited options, per se; quite a few payment rails exist in the U.S. that enable the transfer of money to different countries. While the method you should choose will vary based on amount, context, and intent, none of them move as quickly as domestic payments can. This issue can cause serious problems for individuals and companies that want to make urgent international payments. It’s not a new development either; this is a problem that’s persisted throughout most of the United States’ lifetime as a nation.
International Payments From the U.S.: A Quick History
Our modern selection of cross-border payment options was assembled piece by piece over the last century, with each new rail built to solve a problem the previous one couldn't.
The oldest method in widespread use today is the wire transfer network. The telegraph wire transfer technically dates to the 1870s, when Western Union began transmitting payment instructions between cities. The modern electronic version took shape in 1915 when the Federal Reserve launched Fedwire, allowing banks to transfer funds between Federal Reserve accounts in real time. SWIFT followed in 1973, replacing the earlier Telex system for international bank-to-bank messaging. Users could now send money through the SWIFT network to other countries with the help of “nostro” and “vostro” accounts.
A nostro account refers to “our” account held by a domestic bank on behalf of a foreign bank, while a vostro account is “your” account held by a foreign bank in a domestic bank. This concept actually predates basically all banking technology, dating back to 14th century Italy.
Each system from Western Union to SWIFT brought extra speed and security for large, high-trust transactions, eliminating the need to send checks in the mail or even deliver money by hand. With that reliability comes a bit of priciness; today’s international wires routinely carry $25–$50 fees per transaction, and correspondent banks along the routing chain often deduct their own charges along the way, meaning the recipient gets less than was sent.
The ACH network arrived in the early 1970s as a similar solution to a different problem. Where wire transfers were designed for large, individual, high-value transactions, ACH was built for high-volume, low-value, repetitive payments. These payments are the kinds a business needs to run payroll for thousands of employees or collect monthly utility payments from millions of customers. The first ACH payment system launched in San Francisco in 1972, and the national network consolidated from there.
By processing payments in batches rather than individually, ACH could handle enormous volumes cheaply. However, that batching technique meant processing happened on a schedule, not in real time, leading to the 1–3 business day settlement window that ACH still deals with today. Much later down the road in 2009, International ACH was developed, with settlement taking around 1–5 business days with fees around $5 per transfer.
Believe it or not, card networks beat these two payment systems to the punch in 1953, when Diners Club created a charge card that was usable in the USA, Mexico, Canada, Cuba, and the United Kingdom. Current card giants like Visa and Mastercard developed international capabilities in the 1960s and 70s. As groundbreaking as this was, it wasn’t immediately useful for cross-border payments, since you yourself as the cardholder personally had to be across borders to make the payments.
This changed with the advent of virtual corporate cards, which became practical in the 2000s with the maturation of card network APIs. Finally, companies could use cards for B2B purchases. Instead of a physical card, a unique card number is generated for a specific transaction or vendor relationship, and funds can be sent electronically without a swipe or tap. The authorization is instant and settlement follows in 1–3 business days.
None of the above payment rails are particularly convenient for individuals sending small amounts internationally, mostly because of fees and intended contexts. In response, platforms like Wise and Remitly were created in the early 2010s to offer convenient payment methods that either come with low fees or fast settlement times (but not both). To bring this all full circle, you can also visit brick-and-mortar Western Union locations to send money for various cash advance fees.
The United States has been engineering international payments for 150 years, and yet, none come with a perfect combination of fast settlement times and low fees. There just isn’t a catch-all that combines the two… unless you use the blockchain. More on that later.
But Why The Delays?
Each cross-border payment rail forges its own path. For instance, many wire transfers have to hop between corresponding banks like an expensive relay race. No matter how exactly they travel, each method encounters a common obstacle in the form of international payment regulations.
Every dollar sent from the United States to foreign nations gets checked against OFAC screening lists, Know-Your-Customer (KYC) frameworks, Anti-Money Laundering (AML) regulations, and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) guidelines. OFAC lists and KYC frameworks were put in place to help fight anonymity and clarify the identities of all parties involved in a given international payment. AML and CFT are pretty self-explanatory, given their names.
These laws are enforced by a complex board of national regulators, regional authorities, and international standard-setting bodies. Oversight at this level, while important for battling illicit activities, is a large part of the reason transfers to and from the United States take as long as they do. In fact, OFAC sanctions, AML regulations, and CFT guidelines are actually U.S.-exclusive laws. Foreign nations that exchange payments only need to pass through KYC frameworks to get their funds from one location to the next.
This brings us to the second reason international payments are slow: the United States itself. While there’s an argument to be made that its strict regulations are essential to financial security, each of these checks take time. Many other countries have outpaced the U.S. by bypassing tedious screening checkpoints and developing more convenient systems.
How the Rest of the World Does It
Countless other countries have developed inexpensive methods of cross-border transfers that take less than a day to settle. One of the biggest initiatives that has made this possible is Europe’s Single Euro Payments Area, or SEPA. The “Area” in question is a network of 41 European countries whose citizens can use the rail to send payments to other SEPA nations. These transfers are available 24/7, including weekends and holidays.
Since 2008, SEPA members have had the choice between standard cross-border payments (settling in 24 hours with fees around €0.20) and instant transfers (settling in minutes with various higher fees). As efficient as that sounds, the European Union passed new laws last year that actually made SEPA payments even better. As of January 1st, 2026, banks and other payment services are no longer allowed to charge customers more money for using instant transfers. This means all Europeans in the SEPA zone can send money to each other near-instantly for less than 1 euro.
With this, the EU has essentially created a country-to-country version of the United States’ real-time payment rails. The difference is that SEPA links dozens of different borders, while FedNow and the RTP network are limited to the thick black lines on the map.
Similar developments have also been active in other parts of the world. Singapore and Thailand were the first nations in the East to develop an instant payment network, linking their RTP (real-time payment) systems in 2021. Members of both countries can send funds in minutes with fees benchmarked against basic domestic banking charges. Following this achievement, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) began working on an initiative called Project Nexus, which may one day allow a wide number of participating countries to send real-time payments to each other by connecting to a centralized platform.
As BIS general manager Agustin Carstens said in 2024, “Even with just the first wave of connected countries, Nexus has the potential to connect a market of 1.7 billion people globally, allowing them to make instant payments to each other easily and cheaply.” That 1.7 billion person swath doesn’t include Americans, as the United States is not currently participating in the project.
It’s not easy for foreign payment systems to connect to the U.S. without explicit assistance. For example, England’s TransferGo allows users to send money to America for a ~ €0.99 fee, but it’s not possible for American users to send money back. According to their CEO, Daumantas Dvilinskas, “Setting up a full-fledged TransferGo subsidiary in the States would be too much work, especially with state-by-state regulation of banking.”
Daumantas is likely referring to the acquisition of money transmitter licenses, which you need to obtain to operate as a payment service in a given jurisdiction. For the most part, each country has a single national regulator for payment services, and you only need to grab one license. For the United States, you need a staggering 49, representing one for each state except Montana. Some services may push through and get their license in every state, but for others like TransferGo, it just isn’t worth the hassle. A foreign service provider has to look at their resources and decide whether they want to expand to a country that’s about 49 times more tedious to enter than other countries.
With all this said, there may be light at the end of the tunnel for Americans who want better international rails. In April 2026, the U.S. Federal Reserve expressed interest in allowing banks to use FedNow (a domestic real-time network) to send payments internationally with the help of intermediaries. These intermediaries would come in the form of correspondent banks, so it’s unclear exactly how quick and cheap this option would be – but it’s a start.
You might not have the time to sit around and wait for the U.S. to develop a new payment rail. If you’re looking to send money internationally right now, there’s one more option that doesn’t pass through time-consuming regulatory checks or a stubborn centralized entity: cryptocurrency.
The Emergence of the Blockchain
Cryptocurrency can be sent near-instantly to any individual with a digital wallet, regardless of their location or jurisdiction. This is possible thanks to blockchains, which are decentralized digital ledgers that enable the execution and recording of financial transactions. A blockchain stores data across multiple nodes (computers), and crypto transfers are validated through network-wide consensus. This creates a tamper-proof chain that provides more data integrity, security, and speed.
Unlike every other payment rail that’s existed throughout history, blockchains aren’t overseen by a centralized authority. This means that there can’t be a single point of failure and users get to retain full, self-custodied ownership of their digital assets. It also means that payments don’t have to be interrupted by intermediary banks or sanctioned screenings. That said, crypto issuers are still subject to certain regulations, including KYC, but these are more often enforced through identity verification at onboarding rather than on a per-transaction basis.
It’s easy to see how blockchains have been a massive disruption to traditional banking systems. In fact, 2023 saw the SEC sue Coinbase for allegedly operating as an unregistered securities broker. That action was dropped about 18 months later. Fast forward three years, and the SEC is readying plans for crypto stock trading as we speak, calling the upcoming regulations an “innovation exception”. It’s right there in the name – the U.S. government sees blockchains as too innovative to continue to fight against.
Meanwhile, traditional banks haven’t yet embraced cryptocurrency alongside their fiat accounts. J.P. Morgan allows customers to hold crypto ETFs, but that’s about it. If you want to buy and sell digital tokens, you can’t use Bank of America, Chase, or any other mainstream banking platform. You have to turn to fintechs.
Fintechs are digital-first financial platforms that allow users to manage and gain insights into their finances through proprietary systems. Due to a combination of cutting-edge technology and a general interest in staying ahead, many fintechs have fully embraced the blockchain by allowing users to buy, sell, and hold tokens alongside their standard balances.
Not only does this allow everyday people to access crypto more easily, but it also represents an intriguing advantage to businesses that send money across borders. Digital currencies can travel from one digital wallet to the next in mere seconds, even if one wallet is on the other side of the world. That means that a company can send a six-figure payment to another company without waiting for several days or worrying about fees. Because of their volatility, though, using popular coins like Bitcoin or Ethereum is rather impractical for business transfers. That’s why stablecoins were created.
How Stablecoins Make Cross-Border Payments Simple
In 2014, a stablecoin called USDT was created and pegged 1:1 to the U.S. dollar. It was born to bring crypto back to its roots: a digital-only payment method that mimics fiat currency. When sending stablecoins, the value sent and received will always be virtually identical, which isn’t always the case with more volatile types of cryptocurrency. It can even be more stable than traditional fiat, as foreign exchange fluctuations can lead to a shift in price during settlement delays.
Speaking of price, you might think that the near-instant speeds of crypto may bring higher fees. This isn’t the case; stablecoin transfers usually cost less than a dollar, depending on the blockchain being used.* Certain blockchains, such as Solana, charge less than a penny.
If you’re not convinced by the high speeds, low fees, and strong reliability of stablecoins, let’s look at each United States payment rail side-by-side:
Stablecoins carry lower fees and move faster than any other option that Americans have access to. Despite their convenience, though, they haven’t been universally adopted (yet). Some vendors may be staunchly anti-crypto, preferring the simplicity of higher fees over the perceived complexity of learning a new system. If you’re sending money to a foreign family member, they could be baffled by the overall concept. Even if your mom doesn’t get it, the rest of the world is beginning to.
As word spreads about the versatility of these coins and U.S. citizens remain frustrated by the lack of convenient cross-border payment options, more and more people are projected to turn to crypto. J.P. Morgan estimates that the market cap of stablecoins may double or triple within the next three years alone. Even though crypto can seem intimidating at first, the user-friendliness of digital wallets has led to both everyday people and large corporations adopting stablecoins to save time and money on international transfers.
Fintechs have also driven this shift by supporting stablecoins within their platforms alongside traditional cryptocurrencies. Slash, for instance, is a neobank that comes with built-in on/off ramps for USDC and USDT that allow users to convert their crypto to fiat with fees often less than 1%.⁴ With its volume-based tier pricing, these fees can lower as your transaction volume goes up.
We know that stablecoins aren’t best for every cross-border transaction, especially when sending a one-time payment to a supplier that has no interest in hearing about blockchains. For those scenarios, Slash also supports international wire transfers, global ACH, and virtual Slash Visa® Platinum Cards that can earn users up to 2% cash back.¹ If you’re looking to send a quick payment within U.S. borders, Slash users can utilize real-time payment rails like FedNow and RTP. No matter the payment rail you use, every transaction is visible on our financial dashboard, allowing you to know what’s settled and what’s still pending.
It’s frustrating to watch so many other countries enjoy cheap, near-instant cross-border payments while the United States takes baby steps. With Slash’s support for stablecoins, you can finally join them.
*Reflects on-chain gas fees only. Platform processor fees (typically 0.5%–1%) apply separately.
Read more from us
