Why suppliers get short-paid on international wires: SWIFT charge codes, intermediary deductions, and FX markups. Plus a 7-step audit for any quote.
Hidden fees in international wires sit in three places: deductions by intermediary banks, fees charged by the recipient's bank, and an FX markup built into the exchange rate. The SWIFT charge code, OUR, SHA, or BEN, decides who pays the bank fees. Compare quotes on the amount that lands, not the headline fee. BlindPay quotes show the market rate and the rate you get side by side.
Key takeaways
Hidden fees are costs you pay but don't see on the quote: deductions by banks in the middle, charges by the recipient's bank, and the markup inside the exchange rate. They're legal and common. They're just not disclosed upfront.
A wire is a single instruction, but it travels through several banks. Your bank charges you a sending fee. Then the payment may pass through one or two correspondent banks, which hold accounts with each other to move money between countries. Then the recipient's bank credits the account. Each of those banks can charge, and only the first one is on your quote.
The scale is real. The World Bank's Remittance Prices Worldwide report (Issue 54, Q3 2025 data) found banks were the costliest type of provider at 14.99% of a $200 transfer, against a global average of 6.36%. How much cross-border payments cost in 2026 has the corridor-by-corridor numbers.
OUR, SHA, and BEN are the three values of field 71A, "Details of Charges," in a SWIFT MT103 customer payment message. The field is mandatory, so every SWIFT wire carries one of them.
Swift's MT103 standard, as reproduced in Millennium bcp's MT103 manual, defines them like this:
| Code | Swift definition | What it means in practice |
|---|---|---|
| OUR | All transaction charges are to be borne by the ordering customer | The sender pays every bank's charges, usually through a surcharge. The supplier should get the full amount |
| SHA | Charges on the Sender's side are borne by the ordering customer; charges on the Receiver's side are borne by the beneficiary customer | The sender pays their own bank. Intermediary and receiving bank charges come out of the payment |
| BEN | All transaction charges are to be borne by the beneficiary customer | Every bank's fee, including the sender's bank, is deducted from the amount |
Two companion fields show what was actually charged. Field 71F lists sender's charges deducted along the way, and field 71G shows receiver's charges prepaid by the sender. Under the standard's rules, BEN requires at least one 71F entry, SHA allows 71F but not 71G, and OUR allows 71G but not 71F.
So if a supplier says they were short-paid, ask your bank for the MT103 and read fields 71A, 71F, and 71G. The answer is usually there.
On many bank platforms, yes, SHA is the default option. Within the EU, it's effectively the rule. The EU Payment Services Directive (PSD2), Article 62(2), requires that when both payment providers are in the EU, the payer pays their provider's charges and the payee pays theirs. Article 81 also bars intermediaries from deducting charges from the amount transferred on those payments.
Outside that scope, deductions are normal. A US company paying a supplier in Asia or Latin America by SWIFT should expect them unless it chose OUR. This is for information only and is not legal advice.
Beyond the charge code, four more costs can come out of an international wire: the FX markup, receiving-bank fees, surcharges billed after the fact, and the cost of a returned payment.
Correspondent banking vs stablecoin liquidity explains why each extra bank in the chain adds cost.
Here's how a SHA wire short-pays a supplier. All numbers are illustrative, not taken from any specific bank.
Assumptions: a US company pays a $25,000 invoice to a supplier with a USD account abroad. The wire goes as SHA. The sending bank charges $45. Two correspondent banks deduct $25 and $15. The supplier's bank charges a $20 incoming fee.
| Step | Amount | Who pays |
|---|---|---|
| Sending bank fee | $45 | Sender, billed separately |
| Amount leaving the sending bank | $25,000 | |
| First correspondent deduction | -$25 | Supplier |
| Second correspondent deduction | -$15 | Supplier |
| Receiving bank incoming fee | -$20 | Supplier |
| Amount credited to the supplier | $24,940 |
The supplier is $60 short and marks the invoice as unpaid. Someone now spends an hour on emails to settle $60. Multiply that by every supplier, every month.
Now add conversion. If the supplier's account is in local currency and their bank converts at 2% below the mid-market rate, that's another $499 on the remaining $24,940. The visible fee was $45. The total cost was about $604.
Audit a quote by comparing what lands in the recipient's account against what the mid-market rate says it should be, with every fee counted. These seven steps work for banks, fintechs, and stablecoin providers alike.
The FX math in steps 1 and 2 is the step most teams skip. Stablecoin API quotes explained covers expiry and fee direction in more detail.
A transparent quote shows the market rate, the rate you get, every fee, who pays each fee, the exact amount received, and when the price expires. If any of those are missing, the cost is hidden somewhere.
| Line | Transparent quote | Opaque quote |
|---|---|---|
| Exchange rate | Mid-market rate and offered rate, side by side | One rate, no reference point |
| Fees | Every fee as its own line | "Low fee" or "no fee" |
| Who pays fees | Stated, and selectable | Charge code buried in the bank form |
| Intermediary deductions | None possible, or stated | "May apply" |
| Amount received | Exact, in the recipient's currency | Estimated, or in the sender's currency only |
| Expiry | A fixed time, such as 5 minutes | "Indicative" |
| Tracking | A reference the recipient's bank recognizes | A confirmation email |
This is also where regulators are heading. The FSB's G20 targets ask every payment service provider to show, by end-2027, the total cost of a cross-border payment including fees and FX charges, the expected delivery time, payment tracking, and terms of service.
A zero-fee offer is a red flag when the rate isn't shown next to the mid-market rate. The fee went somewhere, usually into the spread.
Watch for these:
None of these mean the provider is dishonest. They mean you can't compare it to anyone else.
BlindPay prices every payout in a quote that shows the market rate, the rate net of fees, the flat fee, and the exact amount the bank account receives. Nothing moves until you execute that quote.
From the payout quote docs:
commercial_quotation is the raw market exchange rate.blindpay_quotation is the rate net of BlindPay's fee. The gap between the two is the FX cost, as a number.flat_fee is the flat-fee component, and partner_fee_amount shows your own markup if you add one.receiver_amount is the exact fiat amount the bank account receives.cover_fees sets who pays. With false, fees come out of the recipient's amount. With true, they're added on top of the stablecoin amount you send, so the recipient gets the full figure.expires_at tells you exactly when.Most BlindPay payouts never touch a correspondent chain. Pix in Brazil, SPEI in Mexico, ACH and RTP in the US, Transfers 3.0 in Argentina, ACH Colombia, and SEPA in Europe are local rails, so there are no intermediary banks to deduct along the way.
Where no local rail reaches, BlindPay sends SWIFT (POBO/COBO) payouts in USD. Each one carries a UETR, the end-to-end reference every bank in the chain uses, so you can trace it, and the quote's description travels in MT103 field 70, the reference the supplier's bank shows them (POBO and COBO). SWIFT still runs through correspondent banks, so on some corridors a receiving or intermediary bank can apply its own charges outside the quote. Use a local rail when the recipient's country has one. POBO vs COBO explained covers how those SWIFT payments work.
BlindPay's plans are published on the pricing page, there's no pre-funding requirement, and there's no minimum volume. What is real-time cross-border settlement explains how the speed side fits in.
Pull the MT103 for your last three short-paid supplier wires and read fields 71A, 71F, and 71G. Then run the same payments through the 7-step audit using a BlindPay payout quote from a free development instance, and compare the amount each supplier would receive.
Seven places blockchain payments beat bank rails: contractor payroll, remittances, B2B suppliers, marketplaces, 24/7 treasury, bill pay, and PSP payouts.
AP2, ACP, and x402 each verify that an AI agent had permission to spend. Here is what every protocol covers, who backs it, and the reconciliation gap none of them close.
A 10-point checklist and a side-by-side of BlindPay, Wise Platform, Airwallex, Thunes, Bridge, and Circle for real-time, low-fee cross-border settlement.