MERIDIAN GLOBAL FINANCE

ISO 20022 alignment — building to the standard banks are moving to.

The ESTC codex was originally mapped against SWIFT MT message categories. That mapping is now against a retired standard. This page sets out where the industry actually is, maps every ESTC range to its current ISO 20022 equivalent, and is honest about which parts of that mapping are designed rather than implemented.

MT coexistence ended 22 November 2025 Mapped to pacs, pain and camt Migration deadlines run to 2028 Design mapping, not a certified implementation

The thing to know first

SWIFT's MT/ISO 20022 coexistence period for cross-border payments ended on 22 November 2025. Since that date ISO 20022 has been the exclusive standard for cross-border payment instructions and reporting on the SWIFT network. MT 102, MT 102 STP, MT 103 REMIT, MT 201 and MT 203 have been removed entirely.

This matters for how Meridian is positioned. A settlement codex mapped to MT is mapped to something the industry has already left, and any banker reading it will notice. Mapping to ISO 20022 is not a modernisation exercise — it is the difference between speaking the language banks use now and one they retired last year.

Sources: SWIFT ISO 20022 implementation FAQs; SWIFT “10 days to go” adoption briefing, November 2025; J.P. Morgan and ING migration guidance.

Where the industry actually is

The migration did not finish in November 2025. Instruction messages went first; reporting, investigation and cancellation messages are still moving, on published deadlines running to 2028.
Mar 2023
CBPR+ goes live. All institutions must be able to receive ISO 20022 messages. TARGET2 and EBA Clearing complete their migration.
Nov 2025
End of coexistence. ISO 20022 becomes the exclusive standard for cross-border payment instructions. MT 102, 102 STP, 103 REMIT, 201 and 203 removed.
Nov 2026
Unstructured postal addresses retired across CBPR+ messages — fully structured or hybrid only, or the message is rejected. Institutions mandated to receive camt.110 and camt.111.
Nov 2027
Stop and Recall process mandated for payment cancellations. Ancillary messages (pain.002, camt.029, camt.055) to be complete. camt.110/111 send and receive.
Nov 2028
MT/CAMT coexistence ends for payment reporting. CAMT becomes the only permitted format.
The migration is a decade-long programme, not a switch. Meridian has an advantage here that incumbents do not: there is no legacy MT estate to migrate, so the system can be built ISO 20022-native from the start.

ESTC mapped to ISO 20022

Every ESTC range against its current equivalent. The middle column shows what the codex previously cited — struck through where that MT type no longer exists.
ESTCPurposeWas (MT)Now (ISO 20022)
ECH101Single customer credit transferMT 103pacs.008
ECH102Multiple / batch customer transferMT 102pacs.008 (batch)
ECH100Request for transferMT 101pain.001
ECH104Direct debit / recurring mandateMT 104pain.008
ECH200FI transfer, own accountMT 200pacs.009
ECH201Cover paymentMT 202 COVpacs.009 COV
ECH202General FI transferMT 202pacs.009
ECH256Advice of non-payment / returnMT 296pacs.004
ECH292Request for cancellationMT 192 / 292camt.056
ECH416Advice of non-acceptanceMT 296pacs.002 (rejected)
ECH900Confirmation of debitMT 900camt.054
ECH910Confirmation of creditMT 910camt.054
ECH940Customer statementMT 940camt.053
ECH941Balance reportMT 941camt.052
ECH942Interim transaction reportMT 942camt.052
ECH950Priority security protocol / freezeMT 195 / 295camt.110
ECH953Court-ordered reversalMT 196 / 296camt.111 + pacs.004
ECH955KYC/AML escalationMT 199camt.110
ECH734Advice of discrepancyMT 734camt.029

Where ISO 20022 has no equivalent

These ranges are not translation gaps. ISO 20022 is extensible by design, and these would be defined as extensions rather than mapped to existing messages.
ESTCPurposePosition
ECH610Vault chain-of-custody / gold provenanceNo ISO 20022 message exists. Gold provenance has never been a payment-messaging concern because no payment network anchors a unit of account to allocated metal.
ECHB010 / B011Settlement token mint and burnNo equivalent. ISO 20022 assumes value moves between accounts; it has no concept of a unit created for transit and destroyed on arrival.
ECHB040Settlement finality / atomicity proofISO 20022 carries status reports (pacs.002) but has no primitive asserting that partial failure was impossible.
ECHAAA020PAM lifecycleNo equivalent. A sovereign citizen fund is not a payments-messaging construct.
ECHAAA040/041Insurance premium and claimInsurance runs on ACORD, not ISO 20022 payments messaging. Genuinely outside scope rather than missing.

What this page is, and isn't

What's real here

The migration dates, the retired MT types and the MT-to-ISO 20022 equivalences are taken from SWIFT's own published adoption material and from J.P. Morgan and ING migration guidance, not reconstructed from memory. The end of coexistence on 22 November 2025 is a matter of public record. The mapping is a genuine design mapping: each ESTC range has been placed against the message type that actually carries that function under CBPR+, including the cases where one ESTC code maps to a pair of ISO messages.

What this is not

This is a mapping, not an implementation. Meridian does not currently emit or parse ISO 20022 XML, is not connected to SWIFT, and has no CBPR+ accreditation — that work follows authorisation and is a substantial engineering programme in its own right. Message-level mapping is also the easy half: ISO 20022's value is in structured data — party identification, structured addresses, purpose codes, remittance information — and populating those fields correctly is where real migrations consume their budget. Anyone assessing this should read it as a statement of architectural direction, not of readiness.