Does an ISV need a payment license to offer payments?

Not necessarily. On white-label infrastructure, an ISV or ISO can offer payments under its own brand while a partner holds the regulated status, as described in payments without the PSP burden. The software vendor keeps the merchant relationship, sets the pricing its merchants pay and keeps the margin above infrastructure and processing costs.

Not when a partner holds the regulated role

Regulation applies to holding funds, executing payments and underwriting merchants. An ISV or ISO that offers payments under its own brand on white-label infrastructure can leave those roles to a licensed partner, an acquirer, a PSP or a managed PayFac, while it owns the product, the merchant relationship and the pricing. The partner answers to the regulator; the ISV answers to its merchants.

What the ISV keeps

• The merchant relationship and the brand on every screen.
• The price its merchants pay, and the margin above infrastructure and processing costs.
• The onboarding experience inside its software.
• The data generated by payments, for its own features.

When a license becomes a question

If the ISV wants to hold funds, control settlement timing or become a PayFac in its own name, licensing enters the picture, with different rules in the EU, the UK and the US. Many ISVs never need to; the managed model gives them the economics without the regulatory work. Infrastructure that supports both paths lets an ISV start without a license and reconsider later on its own numbers, as described in the "payments without the PSP burden" solution page.