Cross-Border Payments Liquidity and Capital Adviser

The mandate

The finance committee keeps returning to a capital question that growth papers do not resolve: where should payment-market expansion be funded when settlement volatility, local liquidity requirements and cash accessibility differ? A regional return can look attractive while the cash supporting it cannot cross an entity boundary in time. The adviser will test the economics of that constraint, not design a route around regulatory safeguards.

The reserved commitment is four days per month, combining treasury-assumption review, regional finance interviews and one written challenge discussion. Scheduled finance committee attendance is included. Papers arrive six working days beforehand; the adviser acknowledges ad-hoc questions within one business day and responds within three on matters supported by available records. Live settlement management and emergency treasury dealing remain outside the cadence.

The engagement runs nine months from 19 October 2026. Renewal requires the committee chair's explicit decision based on remaining strategic questions and independence. Mumbai is the India base, using remote regional reviews with planned India workshops. Additional overseas attendance or new-market diligence needs separate scope and expense approval rather than an unlimited regional travel expectation.

Regional capital review gives no line authority over licensed payment entities. No executive responsibility for cash movement or settlement approval is transferred to the adviser. Capital release, cash movement, settlement operations and regulated approvals stay with executive and local officers. Advice must distinguish deployable liquidity, loss-absorption capacity and capital needed merely to enter a market, and show how a downside changes the recommended sequence. The committee remains accountable if it chooses growth beyond the stated resilience envelope.

Concurrent advisory work is allowed outside competing payment corridors or counterparties. An interest in a proposed settlement partner, a retainer for a competing expansion bid or paid responsibility for presenting the reviewed business case would conflict. Disclosure, information barriers and recusal are required before access; the adviser may not use the committee's unpublished market economics to support another fundraising narrative.

What you will own

• Test market-entry capital papers against settlement volatility, restricted cash and the evidence supporting assumptions about timely funding availability during normal and stressed settlement periods.
• Question whether liquidity buffers are calibrated to credible operating stress rather than a uniform percentage applied to different payment-market structures.
• Shape regional comparisons that separate growth investment, regulatory capital and working liquidity, making each approval dependency visible before sequencing proposals.
• Press finance owners on the cost and limits of cash mobility, referring legal interpretation to qualified local advisers rather than assuming group fungibility.
• Challenge funding narratives where headline unit economics omit settlement losses, currency timing or the recurring cost of maintaining resilience across differing local operating and funding conditions.
• Recommend staged growth conditions and committee review triggers so approved expansion remains contingent on verified liquidity capacity and local control readiness.

Candidate qualifications

• Evidence senior finance leadership in payments or fintech across multiple markets, with a verifiable career chronology and personally owned treasury, capital or planning decisions. Present one allocation recommendation you changed after testing liquidity constraints, explaining the alternatives and the action influenced. Identify the regulatory or entity-level restriction that prevented apparently available funds from supporting the preferred regional plan.
• Demonstrate understanding of settlement risk, restricted cash, local capital requirements and cross-border financial reporting. Show how you differentiated profitable activity from activity that could be safely funded, including the records and specialist advice needed. The adviser must not treat regulatory safeguards as obstacles to be engineered away.
• Bring strong analytical capability in regional scenarios and unit economics, with a decision example involving adverse volumes, currency timing or counterparty stress. Explain the assumptions that remained uncertain and how you recommended a staged commitment rather than an artificially precise full-investment answer.
• Prove independence and a disciplined finance-committee cadence, including a real conflict, recusal or recommendation rejected by management. Disclose current payment-market, settlement-partner and investment relationships. The role requires credible director-level judgement and predictable monthly availability; it does not presume statutory, licensing or executive treasury authority from prior titles.

Application

Applications for this mandate are received in one way only: through the India Board Terminal's application process. It is automated end to end. Your Executive Passport travels to the mandate holder in its confidential form, your answers to the three questions below are read before anything else in your file, and every stage that follows is recorded on your applications page.

There is no address to write to and no intermediary to call. The mandate holder reads what the Terminal delivers and nothing else, which is what keeps the process the same for every applicant and keeps your name out of it until you release it. Applications close on 7 October 2026. Mandate reference PCT-ADV-2026-IND-46.