By: Eko B. Supriyanto, Editor-in-Chief of Infobank Media Group
The world is no longer volatile, but turbulent. And, in the increasingly turbulent global economic vortex, we are sometimes faced with choices that seem technical, but are actually strategic. At the end of March 2025, the United States (US), through the US Trade Representative (USTR), released a report expressing concerns about Indonesia’s payment or financial system policies.
The world has just witnessed an important event, namely the signing of a reciprocal trade agreement between Indonesia and the US on February 19, 2026. The government calls it a step towards a golden age, especially with the acquisition of a 19 percent tariff. All officials and members of the House of Representatives welcomed it as if they had won a battle.
However, it is important not to be dazzled by the tariff figure alone, but to carefully read what is implied in the details of the agreement. Because, in the world of international agreements, the old saying applies: the devil is in the details. And this time, the “devil” resides in Article 2.29.
The Root of the Problem of Sovereignty
Before discussing this article, it is important to understand the context. Since 2025, the US, through its trade representative office (USTR), has expressed concern about Indonesia’s payment system policy. There are three issues they highlight: the National Payment Gateway (GPN), the Indonesian Standard Quick Response Code (QRIS), and the 2025 Indonesian Payment System Blueprint (BSPI). Essentially, they feel they have not been sufficiently involved.
However, the fact is that GPN and QRIS did not come out of thin air. Both are the result of the hard work of the nation’s children, the collaboration of Bank Indonesia, industry associations, and domestic stakeholders. QRIS, for example, was developed when the world was hit by a pandemic.
In fact, QRIS has become a savior for MSMEs, uniting various payment methods in one sticker, and is now used by 60 million people. Moreover, QRIS has been connected to payment systems in Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, and soon Japan, China, and Saudi Arabia. This is a monumental achievement that has been praised worldwide.
So, why do we suddenly have to open the door wide? Is it because of pressure from the USTR report, which is said to be inaccurate? Or is there another interest at play behind the scenes?
Article 2.29: Too Many “Devils”
Article 2.29 in the annex to this agreement is not merely a technical article. It is a strategic article that touches the heart of our digital sovereignty. At least, there are two crucial paragraphs that we should pay close attention to.
First, regarding cross-border data processing. This article allows international payment networks such as Visa and Mastercard to process domestic credit card transactions and e-commerce transactions abroad. The condition is that Indonesian authorities are given access.
Well, in economic terms, all of this is a relocation of data sovereignty. Imagine the transaction data of mothers at Pasar Lama, Cepu, Central Java. Young people drinking coffee at Kopi Klotok Menoreh in Yogyakarta, or civil servant salaries in Padang, will all flow to servers in San Francisco or New York. Indonesia is only given a ‘key’ to look in, but no longer owns the house.
In an era where data is the new oil, whoever controls the data controls the future. Bank Indonesia and the Financial Services Authority (OJK) may be able to access it, but we lose complete control over its architecture and utilization for national interests, such as the development of artificial intelligence and economic analysis.
Second, regarding international chip standards. This article requires the use of Visa/Mastercard chip standards for all domestic card transactions, including contactless debit cards. On the surface, this seems efficient and modern. However, standards are a gateway to royalties. Every time our cards transact using foreign standards, licensing fees flow out of the country.
Clearly, this is a form of invisible digital customs duty, but it is actually eroding national income. More than that, what will happen to the tens of trillions of rupiah that state-owned and private banks have invested in building local infrastructure such as GPN and national chip standards? Will all of that just go to waste? Thousands of our information technology experts are threatened with losing their creative space.
Selling the Future
Indonesia is not anti-foreign. Since long ago, the people have believed in international collaboration. Visa, Mastercard, JCB, and UnionPay are Indonesia’s partners. Admittedly, Indonesia needs foreign investment and technology. However, investment must be constructive, and technology must transfer capabilities. This agreement seems to reverse that logic. Instead of foreigners entering ownership structures with clear rules, Indonesia’s strategic data is being handed over to them. This is like selling Indonesia’s future.
The government and the House of Representatives may see this as a diplomatic “victory” because they have succeeded in maintaining tariffs. However, I am concerned that this short-term victory will sacrifice the long-term economic foundation. It is like giving matches to firefighters. The agreement gives access to parties that have been eyeing Indonesia’s large market.
It is time to ask clearly. In whose interests was this article drafted? Did the policy makers involve Bank Indonesia and the payment system industry association in depth in the finalization of this agreement? Because, without a comprehensive understanding of the ecosystem, the implementation of Article 2.29 will be like a scalpel that destroys the stitches that have been woven for years.
Indonesia siap bersaing dan berkolaborasi secara bermartabat. Biarlah standar nasional dan internasional hidup berdampingan, bersaing secara sehat dalam inovasi dan efisiensi, tanpa “pengecualian” dan “pemaksaan”. Jangan sampai napas panjang membangun kemandirian sistem pembayaran terhenti oleh satu pasal dalam perjanjian dagang.
Jangan biarkan era keemasan yang kita cita-citakan berubah menjadi era kecemasan, karena terlalu banyak “setan” yang dijumpai dalam rincian perjanjian. Perjuangkan yang terbaik untuk 280 juta rakyat Indonesia. Kedaulatan digital kita sedang dipertaruhkan. Dan, faktanya banyak “ayat-ayat setan” dalam pasal itu merusak tatanan sistem pembayaran yang sudah tertata.
Bak pepatah, “the devil is in the details” jika jawabannya bukan untuk kepentingan 280 juta rakyat Indonesia.
