Direct SEPA Access for PSPs: What It Is, How It Works and When It Makes Sense

For many payment service providers, SEPA access starts through a sponsor bank or another intermediary.

And that can be a perfectly reasonable place to start.

It can help a PSP launch faster, test the market, build the first version of the product and avoid a heavy infrastructure project too early. At the beginning, the main question is often simple: can we start moving payments?

Later, the question changes.

As payment volumes grow and payments become more central to the business, the access model starts to matter more. Who controls the route? Who owns the operational flow? What happens when costs grow with volume? How quickly can changes be made? How much of the roadmap depends on someone else’s infrastructure, priorities and timelines?

That is where direct SEPA access becomes important.

Direct SEPA access gives eligible licensed PSPs and EMIs a more direct route to SEPA payment infrastructure. It can reduce sponsor-bank dependency, give more control over payment operations and create a stronger foundation for scale.

It can also change the risk-management dynamic. With sponsor-bank access, a PSP often has to fit its client onboarding, payment activity and risk processes into the sponsor bank’s framework. With a direct route, the PSP still owns its regulatory responsibilities, but it is not building its operating model around someone else’s client risk appetite.

But it is not magic. And it is not just a technical integration.

Direct SEPA access is an access model decision. It affects cost, control, responsibility, operations, compliance and go-live planning.

This guide explains what direct SEPA access means, how it differs from sponsor-bank access, which routes are available through systems such as CENTROlink and EKS, and when it makes sense for PSPs to consider going direct.

What is direct SEPA access?

Direct SEPA access means that a licensed payment service provider connects to SEPA payment infrastructure through its own access route, instead of relying fully on another institution’s access.

A simple way to think about it:

Sponsor-bank access is like using someone else’s road to reach the payment network.

Direct SEPA access means having your own route.

You still need rules. You still need traffic control. You still need monitoring, responsibility and maintenance. But the route is no longer fully owned by someone else.

That difference matters.

With indirect or sponsor-bank access, a PSP usually depends on another institution to provide access to SEPA payment rails. That institution may control key parts of the payment flow, pricing, operational rules, change timelines and technical limitations.

With direct SEPA access, the PSP can have more control over the way euro payments move. It can reduce dependency on a sponsor bank, manage payment operations more directly and build infrastructure that fits its own growth plans.

This does not mean the PSP has to build everything from scratch.

That is one of the biggest misunderstandings around direct access.

Direct access does not automatically mean building every technical, operational and compliance layer in-house. A PSP can own the access strategy while working with an infrastructure provider that helps with connectivity, integration, testing, maintenance and production support.

The better question is not always:

“Can we build it ourselves?”

The better question is:

“What do we actually need to own?”

For some PSPs, the answer is full internal infrastructure. For many others, the smarter route is managed direct connectivity: more control over the access model, without turning payment rails into a long internal build.

Direct vs indirect SEPA access

The difference between direct and indirect SEPA access is not only technical. It is also commercial and operational.

At the start, indirect access can be easier. A sponsor bank or another intermediary already has access, so the PSP can use that route instead of setting up its own. For early-stage teams, that can make sense.

But over time, the trade-offs can become more visible.

This does not mean sponsor-bank access is bad.

It means the model has a stage.

For a new PSP, sponsor-bank access may be a practical starting point. For a growing PSP, the same setup can become a constraint. The access model that helped the company launch may not be the one that helps it scale.

That is usually the moment when direct SEPA access becomes a serious conversation.

Can PSPs and EMIs access SEPA directly?

Yes, eligible licensed PSPs and EMIs can access SEPA directly through certain routes, subject to requirements, approval and operational readiness.

This is an important point because direct SEPA access is still sometimes seen as a banks-only topic. That view is outdated.

In Europe, routes such as CENTROlink, operated by the Bank of Lithuania, and EKS, operated by Latvijas Banka, have created practical access options for licensed non-bank PSPs, including electronic money institutions and payment institutions.

But “possible” does not mean “automatic”.

A PSP still needs to be properly licensed. It needs the right technical setup. It needs to meet the requirements of the access route. It needs operational processes, compliance controls, monitoring, incident handling and production readiness.

Direct access gives more control.

It also brings more responsibility.

That is why PSPs should not think about direct SEPA access as just another API connection. The API is only the entrance. The real question is whether the whole operating model is ready once payments start moving.

A common misconception is that a PSP must be licensed in Lithuania to use CENTROlink, or licensed in Latvia to access EKS.

That is not the case.

For CENTROlink, the key point is an EEA licence, not a Lithuanian licence. For EKS, access is also relevant for eligible institutions from Latvia and other EU Member States. In practice, the exact route still depends on the institution’s licence, supervisory confirmation, technical readiness and the requirements of the payment system operator.

So the question is not simply “Where are we licensed?”

The better question is: “Are we eligible, ready and set up for the route we want to use?”

Main routes to direct SEPA access: CENTROlink and EKS

For European PSPs and EMIs, two important routes to direct SEPA access are CENTROlink and EKS.

They are not the only things that matter in a payments setup, but they are highly relevant for PSPs looking for a more direct route into SEPA payment infrastructure.

CENTROlink

CENTROlink is a payment system operated by the Bank of Lithuania. It provides access to SEPA for payment service providers licensed within the European Economic Area, including banks, specialised banks, credit unions, electronic money institutions and payment institutions.

For fintechs and PSPs, CENTROlink has become one of the best-known routes for direct SEPA access through Lithuania.

The appeal is clear: a licensed PSP can use a central bank-operated route to access SEPA payment infrastructure, instead of relying only on a sponsor-bank model.

That can help reduce dependency, improve control and support a more scalable payments setup.

EKS

EKS, the Electronic Clearing System, is operated by Latvijas Banka. It processes customer retail payments across the SEPA area and has also become relevant for non-bank PSPs seeking access to SEPA payments through Latvia.

Through EKS, eligible non-bank PSPs can execute regular and instant SEPA credit transfers, depending on their setup and participation.

For PSPs, this creates another route to direct SEPA connectivity in the Baltics.

CENTROlink or EKS?

For many PSPs, the question is not simply “which system is better?”

The real question is:

Which route fits the company’s licence, business model, operational readiness, product roadmap and go-live plan?

There are also practical differences in payment instrument coverage. EKS should currently be viewed as a route for SEPA Credit Transfers and SEPA Instant Credit Transfers, not SEPA Direct Debit connectivity. If SDD is part of the PSP’s roadmap, that requirement should be checked early instead of assumed later.

A PSP should look at:

• licensing setup;
• target markets;
• payment volumes;
• payment types;
• SEPA Instant needs;
• internal technical resources;
• operational ownership;
• reporting and compliance setup;
• timeline to go live;
• cost model at scale.

Choosing the route is not just a technical decision. It is part of the payments strategy.

How direct SEPA access works in practice

Direct SEPA access usually looks simple from the outside.

Connect to SEPA. Start moving payments.

In reality, there are several layers behind that.

A practical direct SEPA access project usually includes seven parts.

1. Business and regulatory readiness

Before choosing the route, the PSP needs to understand whether direct access fits its business model and regulatory setup.

This includes questions such as:

• What licence does the company hold?
• Which countries will it serve?
• What payment services will it provide?
• What volumes are expected?
• Is SEPA Instant needed?
• What customer funds safeguarding model is used?
• What internal operations are already in place?

Direct access should support the business model, not complicate it.

2. Route selection

The next step is choosing the right access route.

For some PSPs, CENTROlink may be the right route. For others, EKS may make more sense. In some cases, the decision may depend on a broader infrastructure strategy that also includes SWIFT, T2, reporting, reconciliation or future payment rails.

This is where early planning helps.

If route selection happens too late, the PSP may discover that its go-live plan, internal resources or operational setup are not aligned with the route it wants to take.

3. Technical integration

This is the part many teams think of first.

APIs. Formats. Messages. Testing environments. Connectivity. Data flows.

But technical integration is not only about making systems talk to each other. It is about making sure they can keep talking when real payments, exceptions, updates and production pressure arrive.

A working test is not the same as a ready operating model.

4. Testing and acceptance

Payment infrastructure needs testing before go-live.

That can include technical testing, message validation, process checks, exception handling, settlement flows, reconciliation and operational scenarios.

The goal is not only to prove that payments can move.

The goal is to prove that the PSP understands what happens when something does not go exactly as planned.

5. Operational setup

This is where many infrastructure projects become more complex than expected.

Who monitors the flow?

Who handles failed payments?

Who owns incidents?

Who communicates with the access route?

Who handles updates?

Who watches cut-off times, settlement, reporting and exceptions?

Direct access is not only about connecting. It is about owning the flow in production.

6. Go-live

Go-live is important, but it is not the finish line.

It is the first moment the setup meets real customers, real payments, real exceptions and real operational pressure.

A good direct SEPA access project should make go-live feel controlled, not heroic.

If everyone needs to act like firefighters on launch day, something was probably planned too late.

7. Production ownership

After go-live, the work continues.

Payment infrastructure needs monitoring, updates, support, compliance alignment and operational discipline. Scheme changes, regulatory changes and business changes all need to be reflected in the setup.

This is why PSPs should think about direct SEPA access as a long-term operating model, not a one-time project.

When does direct SEPA access make sense?

Direct SEPA access does not make sense for every PSP at every stage.

But there are clear signs that it may be time to consider it.

Payments are becoming core to the business

If payments are a side function, the access model may not feel urgent.

But if payments are central to the product, the business cannot afford to treat infrastructure as a background detail.

When payments are the product, payment rails are not back office. They are part of the value proposition.

Volumes are growing

Sponsor-bank access can be convenient at the beginning.

At higher volumes, the economics can change.

Transaction fees, fixed costs, operational costs and dependency costs may start to look different once the PSP is processing more payments.

Direct SEPA access can make the cost model more transparent and potentially more efficient at scale.

Sponsor-bank dependency is slowing down change

Dependency is not always visible until something needs to change.

A new product launch. A new market. A new payment flow. A pricing update. A technical change. A reporting requirement. A scheme update.

If every important change depends on someone else’s roadmap, the PSP may start to feel the limits of indirect access.

The PSP wants more control

Control can mean different things.

It can mean control over costs. Control over operational flows. Control over payment routing. Control over go-live planning. Control over incident response. Control over future payment infrastructure decisions.

Direct SEPA access gives PSPs more room to design the setup around their own needs.

Business continuity becomes more important

As a PSP grows, resilience matters more.

If a large part of the payment flow depends on another institution’s access, technical setup or business decisions, that dependency becomes a business continuity consideration.

Direct access can help reduce that dependency, though it also means the PSP needs strong operational ownership.

The company is planning beyond SEPA

Many PSPs do not only need SEPA.

They may also need SEPA Instant, SWIFT, T2, Verification of Payee, regulatory reporting or other infrastructure components.

In that case, direct SEPA access should be viewed as part of a broader payment infrastructure strategy, not a separate technical task.

When sponsor-bank access may still be enough

Sponsor-bank access is not wrong.

It is often a practical starting point.

For a smaller PSP, or a company still validating its model, using an existing sponsor-bank route can reduce complexity. It may help the team move faster at the beginning, avoid deeper infrastructure work too early and focus on the product.

The problem starts when the company outgrows the model but keeps treating it as permanent.

A setup can be right for launch and wrong for scale.

That does not make the original decision bad. It only means the business has moved to a different stage.

The useful question is not:

“Is sponsor-bank access good or bad?”

The better question is:

“Does this access model still fit where the business is going?”

If the answer is yes, there may be no urgent reason to change. If the answer is no, it may be time to explore direct SEPA access.

Direct access does not mean building everything yourself

One common myth is that direct SEPA access means the PSP has to build the whole infrastructure stack in-house.

That is not always true.

Building in-house can give control, but it also creates a large internal project. The PSP needs people who understand payment schemes, technical integration, testing, operations, production support, compliance requirements, monitoring, change management and future maintenance.

That is not just development work.

It becomes an ongoing infrastructure responsibility.

And for many PSPs, that is not where the company creates its competitive edge.

The product, customer experience, pricing, market strategy and risk model may be where the business truly differentiates. Payment rails need to work, but they do not always need to become the company’s second product.

This is where managed payment infrastructure can help.

A PSP can still choose a direct access strategy, reduce sponsor-bank dependency and gain more control over its payment route. But instead of building every layer internally, it can work with a provider that already understands the rails, processes and production reality.

Focus on fintech. Don’t get stuck building the plumbing.

How Inventi helps PSPs with direct SEPA access

Inventi helps licensed PSPs and EMIs connect to payment infrastructure through one managed Payment Gateway API.

That includes direct SEPA connectivity through routes such as CENTROlink and EKS, as well as access to additional rails such as SWIFT and T2, depending on the business need.

The goal is simple: help PSPs go live faster, reduce sponsor-bank dependency and avoid turning payment connectivity into a long internal infrastructure project.

Inventi supports the practical parts of the journey:

• route planning;
• technical integration;
• onboarding;
• testing;
• production setup;
• updates;
• operational support;
• payment rail expansion.

The PSP still owns its business model, licence, compliance responsibilities and customer relationship.

Inventi helps with the infrastructure layer behind the payments.

For PSPs, this can mean a more practical way to move towards direct SEPA access: more control over the route, without taking on the full weight of building and maintaining everything alone.

FAQ: Direct SEPA access for PSPs

What is direct SEPA access?

Direct SEPA access means that a licensed PSP or EMI connects to SEPA payment infrastructure through its own access route, instead of relying fully on a sponsor bank or another intermediary.

It gives the PSP more control over payment flows, costs, operations and future infrastructure decisions.

Can PSPs access SEPA directly?

Yes, eligible licensed PSPs can access SEPA directly through certain routes, subject to requirements and approval.

Routes such as CENTROlink and EKS have made direct SEPA access a practical option for licensed non-bank PSPs in Europe.

Can EMIs access SEPA directly?

Yes, eligible electronic money institutions can access SEPA directly through certain routes, depending on their licence, readiness and the requirements of the access provider.

This does not mean access is automatic. EMIs still need the right technical, operational and compliance setup.

Do PSPs need a sponsor bank for SEPA payments?

Not always.

Many PSPs start with sponsor-bank access because it can be practical at the beginning. But eligible licensed PSPs may also consider direct SEPA access through routes such as CENTROlink or EKS.

The right model depends on the PSP’s stage, volumes, product, risk appetite, timeline and internal resources.

What is the difference between direct and indirect SEPA access?

With indirect access, a PSP uses another institution’s route to SEPA payment infrastructure.

With direct SEPA access, the PSP has a more direct route and more control over the payment flow.

Indirect access can be easier to start with. Direct access can make more sense when the PSP needs more control, lower dependency and a stronger setup for scale.

What is CENTROlink?

CENTROlink is a payment system operated by the Bank of Lithuania. It provides access to SEPA for payment service providers licensed in the European Economic Area, including banks, specialised banks, credit unions, EMIs and PIs.

For many fintechs, CENTROlink is one of the key routes to direct SEPA access through Lithuania.

What is EKS?

EKS is the Electronic Clearing System operated by Latvijas Banka. It processes retail payments across the SEPA area and enables eligible non-bank PSPs to access SEPA payments through Latvia.

For PSPs, EKS can be another route to direct SEPA connectivity.

Is direct SEPA access cheaper than sponsor-bank access?

It depends on the PSP’s volume, pricing model, operational setup and internal resources.

Sponsor-bank access can be cheaper or easier at the beginning. But at scale, fees, dependency and operational limitations can change the picture.

Direct SEPA access can create a more efficient cost model, but it also requires planning, readiness and operational ownership.

How long does direct SEPA access take to implement?

The timeline depends on the PSP’s readiness, chosen route, technical setup, testing requirements and provider.

With an experienced infrastructure partner, the process can be much faster than building everything in-house. But PSPs should still plan direct SEPA access early, especially if it is tied to licensing, go-live or market expansion.

Does direct SEPA access mean building everything in-house?

No.

A PSP can choose a direct access strategy without building every infrastructure layer internally.

Working with a managed infrastructure provider can help the PSP reduce technical complexity, speed up implementation and keep internal teams focused on the business.

Do PSPs need to be licensed in Lithuania or Latvia to use CENTROlink or EKS?

Not necessarily.

CENTROlink is available to payment service providers holding an EEA licence, including eligible EMIs and PIs. EKS access is also relevant for eligible institutions from Latvia and other EU Member States.

The exact requirements depend on the payment system, the institution’s licence, supervisory confirmation, technical readiness and onboarding process.