As the US Treasury looks to phase out federal check payments under Executive Order 14247, Visa and Mastercard have laid out sharply contrasting blueprints—one focused on open network innovation, the other on secure, scalable infrastructure.
The US Treasury’s drive to modernise federal payments has opened a strategic fault line between the world’s two largest payments networks.
Visa and Mastercard have both thrown their support behind the government’s ambitions, but their proposed methods differ sharply, highlighting a critical tension between innovation and infrastructure in the future of public disbursements.
The submissions respond to the Treasury’s Request for Information (RFI) under Executive Order 14247, issued by the Biden administration in March 2025. The order mandates a phased transition away from paper-based federal payments, including checks and money orders, towards secure, cost-effective, and inclusive digital alternatives.
The government processed over $800 billion in non-electronic payments in FY2023. Check fraud surged during the pandemic, costing agencies time and money and exposing recipients, especially vulnerable populations, to delays and risks.
According to federal data, Treasury checks are 16 times more likely to be lost or stolen compared to direct deposit equivalents.
As part of the RFI process, private sector stakeholders were invited to offer recommendations across four key areas: causes of continued check usage, strategies for encouraging electronic funds transfer (EFT), preferred technologies, and pathways to implementation.
Visa and Mastercard’s responses reveal two distinctly different playbooks.
Visa: Network-driven inclusion with an open architecture mindset
Visa’s submission paints a picture of a globally integrated network operator focused on financial inclusion at scale.
With over $16 trillion moved annually across its network and $40 billion blocked in fraud attempts each year, Visa leans heavily on its risk intelligence, global connectivity, and existing government partnerships.
Crucially, Visa frames its capabilities as part of a broader ecosystem: the company underscores its ability to connect national and community banks, fintechs, processors, and government platforms, functioning as a “bridge” between public goals and private innovation.
In terms of reach, Visa highlights its track record of providing digital access to over 500 million unbanked and underserved individuals globally. The company positions its products, especially prepaid and debit cards, Direct, and mobile innovations, as proven enablers of secure, scalable disbursement.
Visa also supports behavioural nudges, citing the effectiveness of public-private partnerships and campaigns like ‘Go Direct’ to transition Social Security recipients to direct deposit. It backs incentives and storytelling (“real-life testimonials”) to increase digital take-up, while also pushing for policy alignment, such as removing tax refund exemptions from electronic mandates.
Mastercard: Trust, security and scalable infrastructure via government rails
Mastercard, by contrast, centres its response on trust, resilience, and institutional integrity. It highlights its role as a technology enabler, not a card issuer, and showcases its investments in multi-rail infrastructure, including ACH, real-time payments, and digital wallets.
Where Visa proposes expansion of new touchpoints and ecosystem partnerships, Mastercard advises leveraging existing government tools like Direct Express, US Debit and Pay.gov. Rather than introducing new payment methods, it suggests modernising and scaling these trusted rails with AI-powered fraud prevention, tokenisation, and digital functionality.
The company is unequivocal about risk. Mastercard describes the cost of paper checks not just in dollars (over $657 million in FY2024), but in elevated fraud exposure. It emphasises security hardening, compliance, and robust policy execution, pitching itself as a trusted partner for the secure delivery of sensitive public funds.
The submission also calls attention to demographic nuance, citing the correlation between paper check usage and unbanked/underbanked status. It provides data showing that retirement-age Americans and lower-income, minority populations are disproportionately affected, calling for targeted policy responses that embed financial literacy and inclusion.
Key points of divergence
| Topic | Visa | Mastercard |
| Strategic framing | Open network + public-private integration | Trusted rails + scale through government programs |
| Inclusion approach | Ecosystem of partners (banks, fintechs, NGOs) | Government-sponsored accounts (Direct Express, U.S. Debit) |
| Tech emphasis | Push-to-card, Visa Direct, prepaid, mobile, open banking | Multi-rail, AI, tokenisation, cyber resilience |
| Policy recommendations | Repeal check exemptions, incentivise via campaigns | Strengthen existing infrastructure, enforce compliance |
| Tone | Growth-oriented, collaborative | Risk-sensitive, systems-focused |
Outlook for Treasury
With the Treasury now evaluating stakeholder submissions, Visa and Mastercard’s proposals spotlight a critical question for policymakers: should modernisation be driven by expanding digital choice via interoperable networks? Or by fortifying and simplifying what’s already in place?
The answer may lie in balancing both.
But the divergence between the world’s two dominant payments players offers the US Treasury a roadmap for selecting partners not just by their reach, but by how they define modernisation.
