A Fintech Turning Point: How Much Data Should Banks Share?

Fintech startups depend on access to data in order to offer digital banking, mobile payments, peer-to-peer lending, investment platforms, and other new services. Banks often resist giving account information to potential competitors. Both European and American regulators are considering new rules to resolve this standoff about data access that are diverging in style, scope, and ambition—and the outcome could redefine global fintech leadership.

​The US remains ahead, though Europe is catching up. The US counted 13,100 fintech companies in 2024. Europe hosted 9,200, a figure that has more than doubled since 2016. In Washington, the US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is implementing Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act, establishing consumer rights to access financial data.  Brussels is moving forward with the FIDA Financial Data Access Regulation, which aims to broaden data accessibility across savings accounts, mortgages, insurance policies, pensions, and potentially much more.

Although fin techs, consumer organizations, and innovative banking and insurance incumbents welcome expanded data access, some traditional banking and insurance players fear losing customers and question the business case. The new rules, they argue, risk undermining consumer protection and Europe’s financial industry’s competitiveness.

For Europeans, unanswered questions center around the role of so-called tech gatekeepers such as Google and Apple.  European regulators have made no secret of their intention to curb the influence of US tech firms that collect data, connect it, and leverage it to predict what consumers will do.  The European Parliament, European banks, and insurance incumbents want to exclude big tech companies from FIDA.  Although European governments appear divided, the consensus appears to impose strict regulation and supervision on tech companies. Long, hard negotiations lie ahead.

While the US and European goals appear aligned — broadened data access, competition, and innovation — the methods and the underlying philosophies differ. Europe’s FIDA aims to build a standardized, interoperable framework for sharing a broad spectrum of financial data beyond bank checking accounts, including loans, mortgages, savings, and insurance. Its ambition is bold: to empower consumers, level the playing field for new entrants, and reduce dependence on dominant players.

By contrast, the US approach through Section 1033 is narrow and market-led. It seeks to enshrine data access rights but stops short of mandating common technical standards or creating central infrastructures. This reflects a cautious regulatory culture and a traditional deference to incumbent players—including Big Tech firms, who are already deeply embedded in the US financial ecosystem through cloud services, payment infrastructure, and consumer platforms.

The UK’s trajectory sits somewhere in between. Post-Brexit, the UK has maintained its Open Banking framework. However, the pace has slowed. The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority is treading carefully, balancing innovation with financial stability and consumer protection. Whether this caution becomes a competitive advantage or a drag remains to be seen with an Open Finance Roadmap expected within a year.

The Swiss approach to Open Banking and Open Finance may yield valuable insights for jurisdictions exploring non-regulatory models of financial data sharing. Rather than imposing top-down mandates, Switzerland has embraced a market-oriented framework that relies on voluntary, industry-led initiatives. The pace of adoption has remained modest compared to other European markets—likely reflecting entrenched consumer preferences for traditional banking and the continued prominence of cash in everyday transactions.

Australia has emerged as a frontrunner, adopting a proactive approach by extending its Consumer Data Right framework beyond the confines of banking to include energy and telecommunications data.

Behind all these regulatory changes lies a broad contest to control the data economy. In the US, tech giants dominate. In Europe, regulators are pushing for an alternative model where consumer data is not just portable but protected and used to foster homegrown innovation. FIDA reflects not only a regulatory vision but also a geopolitical one: a digital single market where data sovereignty underpins competitiveness.

One thing is clear: consumers seek control over their personal data and how it is used to access improved services based on real-time, personal financial insights. This momentum is expected to extend into new areas — including utilities, healthcare, travel, and telecommunications — broadening the scope and significance of data sharing, or rather “data access.”

The question now remains who can access financial data, but also who can harness it to build the next generation of digital financial services. Europe is betting on rules and standards, the US on markets and momentum. The global fintech ecosystem will be shaped by which model proves most resilient—and most capable of earning consumer trust.

Padraig Nolan is a Non-resident Fellow with the Tech Policy Program at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA). He serves as Chief Operating Officer of ETPPA, a prominent EU fintech association. He is also an advisory board member of the Lisbon-based Europe Startup Nations Alliance. Padraig holds a bachelor’s degree in law and economics (University of Galway) and a master’s degree in European law (Utrecht University).

Bandwidth is CEPA’s online journal dedicated to advancing transatlantic cooperation on tech policy. All opinions expressed on Bandwidth are those of the author alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.

Comprehensive Report

By Ronan Murphy

European Union digital regulations are spreading across the globe. CEPA is mapping where similar rules have been adopted or are under consideration, starting with the Digital Markets Act.

March 19, 2025

Learn More