|WikiProject Finance||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
What about 12 digit codes?
There are some banks using (9+3) 12 digit SWIFT codes, but no information is available at SWIFT website regarding these new version of codes comparing old (8+3) 11 digit codes. Is there anybody else who can put some light on the issue?
12 digit BIC includes the Logical Terminal for swift, as the 9th character,
stupid but historical position to place it, and it does not form part of ISO-9362.
8 char BIC = (4 char Business/Bank Code) + (2 char Country code) + (2 char Location Code)
11 char BIC = (4 char Business/Bank Code) + (2 char Country code) + (2 char Location Code) + (3 char Branch Code)
12 char BIC = (4 char Business/Bank Code) + (2 char Country code) + (2 char Location Code) + (1 char Logical terminal) + (3 char Branch Code)
SWIFT codes are not much authenticated itself!
You would be amazed to know that SWIFT codes are not even much authentic itself! There are banks in the world which are using more than 11 digit of SWIFT code by mistake for years and SWIFT system can't detect those. SWIFT works like a FAX machine or just a relaying machine without verification of contents including its own BIC/SWIFT codes.
Isn't it VERY FUNNY that the whole banking systems of the world are working on a BIG security breach that is even certified by ISO!!!
- Agrani Bank, one of the largest banks in Bangladesh uses their SWIFT code as AGBKBDDHA001. They added an A at the end of SWIFT code before the branch code by mistake or wrong information from SWIFT. But that bank didn't face any problem while transacting billions of dollars internationally with that wrong SWIFT code for years!
Without correct Username & Password you can't even log into a FREE email account BUT you can transact billions of dollars through SWIFT easily! ;-)
- According to BIC Online, there is no A in the correct code:
- BIC Code AGBKBDDH001
- Institution name AGRANI BANK
- Branch name (PRINCIPAL BRANCH, DHAKA)
- City heading DHAKA
- Address AGRANI BANK BHAVAN: 9 D, DILKUSHA C / A
- Zip Code 1000
- POB Zip
- POB Number
- Location MOTIJHEEL, DHAKA
- POB Location
- Country BANGLADESH
- POB Country
- (Stefan2 09:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC))
--- To my knowledge, usually every standard needs to be validated before its apporval and I believe that ISO is working on that. However, the issue of overlaping among BIC, BIN and IBAN remains controversial. If there is a protocol to harmonize the three applicaitons, that would be beneficial.
The following example is how pharmaceutical industry to harmonize different standards.
Suppose there is a chemical Sodium Chloride which is made following Pharma GMP protocol.
In a GLP qualified lab, if the chemical passes the test against United States Pharmacopeia (USP), it is of the one star quality for drug use and can be cosumed within the US.
If it passes the tests of British Pharmacopoeia (BP) and USP, it is of the two star quality for drug use and can be consumed within the Britain and US.
If it passes the tests of Japanese Pharmacopoeia (JP), USP and BP, it is of the three star quality for drug use and can be consumed among Japan, Britain and US.
If it passes the tests of European Pharmacopoeia (EP), USP, BP and JP, it is of the 4 star quality and so on.
Why is it ranked in that way? Because these Pharmacopoeia are the toppest levels of the pharma standards recoganized in the world so far.
In addition to that the chemical has its own laboratory, analytical and other different grades of its standards.
If the laboratory grade chemical is to use for analytical purposes, it has to be subjected for the testing against the specifications of analytical standards to get upgrade.
These kinds of protocols have been practiced widely in the pharma industry to cate for economic demands and safety measures.
As long as the level of the standard perfomrance or risk is labelled, it is up to users to chose which one to go. Similar practices have been adoppted in the hotel/motel rankings and coach (bus and sport) classing.
- ---Are you sure you don't mix up the 12-character technical FIN address including Logical Terminal Code (LTC) of that bank with the ISO standard BIC8 or BIC11? Most likely, the 'A' you refer to is not part of the BIC code itself, but added by the interface software (when sending) or the network itself (when receiving) to route the message to a technical endpoint. It is therefor not part of the ISO standard, but added for technical reasons to facilitate transfer. With the extra character one can thus identify up to 26 different logical destinations at a single financial institution's country/location that all accept incoming traffic for the same 'BIC'.
- The extra character has nothing to do with the ISO standard, but is used for technical delivery, as specified in the FIN protocol.
- When you say that this BIC it's incorrect per the ISO standard, you are totally correct. But possibly, you are not looking at a BIC at all, but at the sender or receiver of technical messages sent over the SWIFTNet FIN system.
- The standard has no relation to the protocol, other than that SWIFT uses standardised names for its internal routing over its network.
- So yes, you will see BIC-like codes all the time, but used for addressing, not for standardised identification of the financial institution itself. That would be a real BIC.(184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC))
I removed the following content from the page, as it didn't *seem* to have anything to do with SWIFT codes. If I'm mistaken, please provide an appropriate citation...
- "Illegal Character" → "Suggested phrase"
- § → PARAGRAPH
- ” → INCHES
- ’ → FEET
- # → NO.
- % → 0/0 (zero/zero), PCT. or PER CENT
- & → + and AND
- = → VIZ. or EQUAL TO
- @ → AT
- > → LARGER THAN
- < → LESS THAN
- æ → AE
- ø → OE or O
- å → AA
- £ → GBP
- $ → USD
- € → EUR
Mordecai-Mark Mac Low 20:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
This entire page was a cut and paste job
I removed the information below from the page (ie everything), because the whole lot is simply cut and past from a commercial site http://www.bankingswiftcodes.com/index.html I am sure it is all accurate, but it is plagiarism. Sad mouse 16:04, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- And, yet, that page is not commercial but has GNU FDL license. Special:Contributions/220.127.116.11 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, but is it really policy to simply plagiarise an entire article? And does that mean that the conditions have to be included within the article for copying to be valid? I have removed the article again until it is confirmed that it is fair use. I still believe it is bad policy. Sad mouse 22:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
- As can be seen by viewing the edit history of this article, and judging by the fact that the URL you pointed to is a spam portal, I wouldn't consider this to be proof of copying TO Wikipedia, I'd say it's proof of copying FROM Wikipedia, which is perfectly allowed, anyway. In case you're unaware, spam portals are notorious for just copying data from Wikipedia and other public information sources in order to appear legitimate. Because of this, I've reverted your edit. (I forgot to sign in before I did so, so I'm letting you know here that this edit is mine. -- Christopher C. Parker t c 18:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- As further evidence of the notion that the URL you cited is a domain squatter/spam portal/[insert term here], there's an "Inquire about this Domain" link on the bottom that brings you to http://www.bankingswiftcodes.com/index.html?inquire, giving you the opportunity to make an offer on the domain name. Also, all of the links on the left navigation panel point to pages of nothing but Sponsored Links. The "Search" feature on the site does the same thing. To go one step futher, a whois of bankingswiftcodes.com will show that the domain is hosted by Bodis, a domain parking service provider. -- Christopher C. Parker t c 18:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
ISO 9362 (also known as BIC code or SWIFT code) is a standard format of Bank Identifier Codes approved by the International Organization for Standardization. It is the unique identification code of a particular bank.
It can be found on account statements. It is necessary for sending money across countries. It may be found on currency. These codes are used when transferring money between banks, particularly international transfers.
The overlapping issue between ISO 9362 and ISO 13616 is discussed in the article International Bank Account Number.
The code is 8 or 11 characters, made up of:
- 4 characters - bank code
- 2 characters - ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code
- 2 characters - location code
- 3 characters - branch code, optional ( 'XXX' for primary office)
Where an 8-digit code is given, you may assume that it refers to the primary office.
The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) handles the registration of these codes. For this reason, Bank Identifier Codes (BICs) are often called SWIFT addresses or codes.
There are over 7,500 "live" codes (for partners actively connected to the BIC network) and an estimated 10,000 additional BIC codes which can be used for manual transactions.
Examples As an example, Deutsche Bank is an international bank; its head office is based in Frankfurt, Germany. Its SWIFT code for its primary office is DEUTDEFF:
- DEUT identifies Deutsche Bank
- DE is the country code for Germany
- FF is the code for Frankfurt
Using an extended code of 11 digits (if the receiving bank has assigned branches or processing areas individual extended codes) allows the payment to be directed to a specific office. For example, DEUTDEFF500 would direct the payment to an office of Deutsche Bank in Bad Homburg.
Found on currency?
I removed this claim from the article:
- It may be found on currency.
I guess that's technically true, since everything might be found there, but I don't think any currency would contain a SWIFT code, because it doesn't make sense: the code identifies a bank, not a currency. AxelBoldt 00:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Is it SWIFT or BIC?
The article is very vague on the correct name: as I understand it, they were called SWIFT codes because they are issued by SWIFT and did not have a proper name. Now SWIFT has called them BIC. Is this right? The article uses all names without any structure. As I see it almost all references should be changed to BIC, but I'm not very sure if this is the current, correct name.