Zimbabwe in talks with NPCI to build UPI-based payments network

Zimbabwe is negotiating with NPCI International Payments Ltd, the international arm of India’s National Payments Corporation of India, to use technology based on India’s Unified Payments Interface for a new real-time payments system. The proposed network would connect banks, mobile-money operators, fintech companies and other payment providers through common infrastructure, with the objective of making domestic transactions faster and cheaper.

Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Governor John Mushayavanhu said negotiations could conclude by October 31. The proposed agreement would represent a significant expansion of India’s digital-payments technology footprint in Africa because Zimbabwe would not merely accept UPI for Indian users; it would potentially use the underlying technology to build part of its own national payments infrastructure.

Key takeaways

• Zimbabwe is negotiating with NPCI International over a UPI-based payments system.
• The proposed infrastructure would connect banks, mobile-money operators and fintech companies.
• Zimbabwe wants to reduce transaction costs and make transfers faster.
• The system could improve interoperability between otherwise separate payment platforms.
• Talks could conclude by October 31, but that is a potential agreement deadline, not a launch date.
• Cross-border payments and remittances could eventually be added, although they are not part of the immediate proposal.
• The move follows NPCI International’s agreement with Namibia to develop a UPI-style instant-payment system.
• For India, the talks demonstrate how UPI is increasingly becoming an exportable payments technology rather than only a domestic payment network.

Zimbabwe turns to India’s payments technology

Zimbabwe is looking to India’s experience with digital payments as it seeks to modernise its own financial infrastructure.

The proposed arrangement would use technology developed around UPI to create common rails connecting different financial-service providers.

That distinction matters.

Zimbabwe is not simply considering allowing Indian consumers to use UPI while travelling in the country. Instead, the proposed system would use the architecture behind India’s instant-payment ecosystem to connect Zimbabwean banks, mobile-money operators, fintech businesses and other payment providers.

The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe expects such interoperability to make payments faster and potentially reduce the cost of moving money between providers.

The discussions are being led by the central bank, with Governor John Mushayavanhu saying an agreement could potentially be reached by October 31.

Until an agreement is signed, however, the proposal remains under negotiation.

Why Zimbabwe wants a common payments system

Zimbabwe’s payments market includes banks, mobile-money platforms and other financial-technology providers.

When these systems operate with limited interoperability, customers can face additional costs and friction when transferring money between different providers.

A common payments infrastructure can address part of that problem by creating a shared mechanism through which participating institutions can communicate and settle transactions.

The proposed UPI-based system could support account-to-account transfers and merchant payments in real time.

For consumers, the potential benefit is straightforward: faster payments with fewer steps.

For businesses, especially smaller merchants, lower transaction costs could make electronic payments more attractive.

The Reserve Bank also expects greater digitalisation to provide better visibility into economic activity among small and medium-sized businesses.

That could eventually help policymakers obtain more reliable information about business activity and the contribution of smaller companies to the economy.

UPI’s real value is interoperability

UPI is often described simply as an instant-payment platform.

Its more important innovation is interoperability.

In India, customers can use different banks and payment applications while still accessing a common underlying payment infrastructure.

That allows a customer using one application to send money to someone using another bank or application without requiring both users to be part of the same closed network.

The same principle could be useful in Zimbabwe.

Instead of forcing banks, mobile-money operators and fintech companies to build individual connections with every other provider, a shared infrastructure can provide a common connection point.

The result is potentially a larger digital payments ecosystem with fewer technical barriers between participants.

This is particularly important in markets where mobile-money services play a major role alongside conventional banking.

Zimbabwe is already working on payment interoperability

The proposed partnership does not come out of nowhere.

Zimbabwe’s central bank has already been pushing payment providers toward greater interoperability.

In March, the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe issued guidance requiring banks and payment providers to align their platforms, mobile applications and merchant services with new QR-code standards.

The objective is to make payment acceptance work across different providers rather than allowing merchants to become dependent on isolated systems.

The proposed Indian technology partnership could therefore complement reforms already under way in Zimbabwe.

The technology alone, however, will not automatically reduce costs.

The eventual pricing structure will depend on how banks, mobile-money companies, fintechs and other participants are charged for accessing the infrastructure.

The potential cost savings are still unclear

Zimbabwe’s government has said the proposed system should reduce transaction costs, but no specific estimate of customer savings has been disclosed.

That is an important distinction.

Building shared infrastructure can reduce duplication and improve efficiency, but the final price paid by consumers and businesses also depends on the fees charged by participating financial institutions.

If banks and payment companies pass infrastructure efficiencies to customers, competition could push transaction costs lower.

If providers retain much of the efficiency gains as additional revenue, the direct savings for customers could be smaller.

The eventual commercial structure will therefore be just as important as the technology itself.

NPCI International is taking UPI overseas

For NPCI International, Zimbabwe would represent another step in a broader international expansion strategy.

NPCI International Payments Ltd was established as the overseas arm of NPCI to take Indian payment technologies into international markets.

The organisation has increasingly pursued two different strategies.

The first is enabling Indian users to make UPI payments abroad.

The second, potentially more strategically significant, is helping foreign countries develop their own instant-payment systems using UPI as a technological reference or foundation.

Zimbabwe falls into the second category.

That means the potential agreement could generate international value for India’s payments ecosystem even without Zimbabwe becoming a market where Indian consumers directly use their existing UPI applications.

Namibia provides an important precedent

Zimbabwe would not be the first African country to work with NPCI International on a UPI-style national payments system.

In May 2024, NPCI International signed an agreement with the Bank of Namibia to support development of an instant-payment system modelled on UPI.

The objective included improving interoperability and enabling instant person-to-person and merchant payments.

The Namibia agreement is significant because it demonstrates that India’s payments expertise is being considered as infrastructure for domestic financial systems outside India.

NPCI International has also pursued similar technology partnerships in other international markets, including Peru and Trinidad and Tobago.

The strategy effectively turns India’s experience in building a massive real-time payments network into an exportable technology proposition.

UPI has reached enormous scale in India

The scale of India’s domestic UPI ecosystem is one reason countries are interested in the technology.

According to NPCI data cited by Indian authorities, UPI processed about 24.5 billion transactions worth roughly ₹29.82 lakh crore in August 2026.

The system had 752 participating banks at the time.

That scale provides India with a substantial real-world track record in operating high-volume instant payments.

The system has also developed a large ecosystem of banks, payment applications, merchants and technology providers.

For countries trying to build or modernise instant-payment infrastructure, the attraction is not simply the technology itself. It is the experience of operating a system at enormous scale.

UPI is becoming part of India’s technology diplomacy

The Zimbabwe discussions also fit into India’s broader effort to internationalise UPI.

Indian policymakers increasingly view the payments system as an example of India’s digital public infrastructure expertise.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi said in September that UPI should be integrated with payment systems in more countries, describing international expansion as evidence of India’s progress in digital payments.

UPI was operational in 11 countries as of September, according to the Indian government.

The overseas strategy has two potential benefits for India.

First, international acceptance can make payments easier for Indian travellers and the Indian diaspora.

Second, exporting the underlying technology can strengthen India’s position as a provider of digital public infrastructure.

Zimbabwe would primarily represent the second opportunity.

Cross-border payments could come later

The immediate Zimbabwe proposal focuses on domestic payments.

However, cross-border transactions could eventually become part of the system.

The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe has indicated that international payments and remittances could potentially be integrated at a later stage.

That could become economically important.

Zimbabwe has a substantial diaspora, while remittances are an important source of foreign currency for many developing economies.

Cross-border payment systems often involve several intermediaries, creating additional costs and processing time.

If a domestic instant-payment system is eventually connected to international payment networks, it could help reduce some of that friction.

But such a development would require separate agreements, regulatory coordination, foreign-exchange arrangements and technical interoperability.

It should therefore be viewed as a potential future application rather than part of the immediate Zimbabwe-NPCI negotiations.

Why Africa matters to NPCI

Africa represents a significant opportunity for digital payments infrastructure.

Many African markets have developed strong mobile-money ecosystems, but payment systems can remain fragmented across providers and countries.

A common real-time infrastructure can potentially improve interoperability while allowing banks and fintech companies to build services on top of shared rails.

NPCI’s experience is particularly relevant because India faced its own challenge of bringing different banks and payment providers onto common infrastructure.

The resulting UPI ecosystem has become one of the world’s largest real-time payment systems.

For African governments, the attraction is the possibility of accelerating digital-payment development without having to build every component from scratch.

For India, the opportunity is to establish its payment architecture as a model for emerging digital financial systems.

The deal could also benefit Zimbabwe’s fintech sector

A common payments infrastructure could create opportunities beyond basic transfers.

Once banks and fintech companies can access a reliable real-time payment rail, they can develop additional services around it.

These could include merchant payments, digital wallets, financial-management tools, lending products and other applications.

The infrastructure effectively becomes a foundation on which private companies can build.

This is similar to India’s own experience.

UPI itself does not determine which consumer application wins. Banks, fintech companies and payment applications compete on top of the underlying infrastructure.

If Zimbabwe follows a similar model, the country could see greater competition among payment providers.

That could encourage innovation while potentially lowering prices.

What could go wrong?

The proposed system also faces challenges.

The first is implementation.

Connecting banks, mobile-money operators and fintech platforms requires technical compatibility, cybersecurity standards and reliable settlement infrastructure.

The second is commercial adoption.

A national payment rail works best when a large number of banks and payment providers participate. If major players remain outside the system, interoperability benefits can be limited.

The third is regulation.

Zimbabwe would need clear rules covering transaction limits, consumer protection, fraud, data security and settlement.

The fourth is trust.

Digital payments require consumers and merchants to trust that transactions will be completed reliably and that disputes and fraud will be handled effectively.

Finally, lower infrastructure costs do not automatically guarantee lower consumer fees.

The commercial model will determine how much of the efficiency improvement reaches end users.

What the Zimbabwe talks mean for India

For India, the potential agreement is another demonstration that UPI has evolved beyond being a domestic payments success story.

The export opportunity is particularly interesting because digital infrastructure can create long-term relationships.

A country that adopts technology based on India’s payment architecture may later build additional connections involving cross-border payments, remittances and merchant networks.

That could strengthen India’s role in global financial technology.

It also gives Indian technology companies and financial institutions more opportunities to participate in the infrastructure surrounding international payments.

The Zimbabwe discussions therefore matter even though the immediate transaction volumes would be far smaller than India’s domestic UPI market.

The strategic value lies in demonstrating that Indian-built payment infrastructure can be adapted to another country’s financial system.

The Bigger Picture

Zimbabwe’s discussions with NPCI International show how India’s biggest digital-payments success is entering a new phase: from a domestic payment network to an exportable technology model.

For Zimbabwe, the attraction is lower-cost, faster and more interoperable payments. For India, the opportunity is to establish UPI-style infrastructure as a global standard for emerging digital economies.

The outcome will depend on whether the two sides can agree on technology, pricing, regulation and implementation. The October 31 target is only a potential deadline for concluding negotiations, not evidence that a national UPI-based system has already been approved or launched.

FAQs

Is Zimbabwe adopting UPI?

Not yet. Zimbabwe is negotiating with NPCI International over a potential UPI-based payments system. An agreement could be reached by October 31, but the system has not been confirmed as launched.

Will Zimbabweans use Indian UPI apps?

Not necessarily. The proposal concerns using UPI technology as common infrastructure for Zimbabwe’s own banks, mobile-money operators and fintech companies. It is different from simply allowing Indian UPI applications to operate in Zimbabwe.

Why does Zimbabwe want India’s payments technology?

The main objectives are to reduce transaction costs, speed up payments and improve interoperability between banks, mobile-money operators and fintech companies.

Has NPCI already worked with other African countries?

Yes. NPCI International signed an agreement with the Bank of Namibia in 2024 to help develop an instant-payment system modelled on UPI.

Looking Ahead

The next milestone is whether Zimbabwe and NPCI International can turn the current negotiations into a formal agreement. If they do, the difficult work will then shift to integrating banks, mobile-money operators and fintech platforms and establishing the commercial and regulatory framework for the new system.

For India, Zimbabwe would provide another test of whether the UPI model can be successfully adapted outside its home market. If more countries adopt similar infrastructure, India’s payments technology could become an important component of digital-finance development across emerging markets.