Merchant of Record (MoR): Do You Need One or Just a Payment Provider?
Published - 15 January 2025
Revised - 07 September 2026
Libby James is the founder and Managing Director of Merchant Advice Service. Since 2016, she has worked directly with businesses and payment providers across merchant accounts, card processing, payment gateways and complex provider requirements.
Libby specialises in high-risk, declined and harder-to-place merchants, as well as businesses requiring specialist payment methods, integrations or international support. She writes and reviews Merchant Advice Service content, drawing on practical experience gained from real merchant enquiries and provider relationships.
A Merchant of Record can remove a significant amount of payment, tax and transaction administration from a business.
But that does not mean every company selling internationally, launching subscriptions or expanding into new markets needs one.
The more important question is:
Who should actually be responsible for the sale to the customer?
For many established businesses, the company can remain the seller and Merchant of Record while using a payment service provider, gateway or acquirer to process payments.
For others — particularly some SaaS, software and digital-product businesses selling across multiple countries — using a third-party Merchant of Record can transfer responsibility for parts of the transaction such as payment processing, tax collection, refunds, disputes and local compliance.
This guide explains the difference and, importantly, when the additional Merchant of Record layer may not be necessary.
A Merchant of Record is the entity responsible for the transaction made with the customer.
That distinction matters because accepting a payment and being responsible for the underlying sale are not necessarily the same thing.
For example, a business might sell software directly to a customer while a payment provider processes the card transaction.
In that arrangement, the software company may remain responsible for:
The payment provider is providing the infrastructure used to accept the payment.
A third-party Merchant of Record arrangement goes further.
Depending on the contractual structure, the MoR may become the entity through which the customer transaction is made and may take responsibility for areas including payment acceptance, tax calculation and collection, refunds, disputes and transaction-level compliance.
Before comparing MoR providers, start with the commercial flow.
| Your business is Merchant of Record | Third-party Merchant of Record | |
|---|---|---|
| Customer buys from | Your business | The contractual structure may place the MoR between your business and the customer |
| Payment processing | PSP, gateway and/or acquirer processes on your behalf | MoR arranges or manages the payment processing |
| Tax administration | Your business remains responsible | May be handled by the MoR for transactions within the agreed scope |
| Refund administration | Your business | May be administered through the MoR |
| Chargebacks | Normally remain part of your merchant relationship | MoR may manage the dispute process and associated exposure, depending on contract |
| Payment provider relationship | Your business contracts directly or through its chosen payment structure | MoR may control the underlying payment-provider relationships |
| Payment data and portability | Depends on your PSP, gateway and token structure | Depends heavily on the MoR contract and infrastructure |
The practical question is therefore not simply:
“Which Merchant of Record provider should we use?”
It is:
“Do we want another company to sit within the commercial transaction at all?”
A payment service provider helps a business accept payments.
Depending on the provider and arrangement, the PSP may supply:
Using a PSP does not necessarily transfer responsibility for the underlying customer sale.
For a conventional merchant relationship, the business generally remains responsible for its customer, product, tax position, refunds and wider commercial obligations while the PSP processes the payment.
This is one reason an established business should not assume that international growth automatically requires a Merchant of Record.
A sufficiently capable international PSP or acquiring structure may provide many of the payment capabilities required while allowing the business to retain the direct customer relationship.
Read our guide to local acquiring vs a global PSP when expanding into Europe.
A Payment Facilitator, usually shortened to PayFac, helps other businesses accept payments through payment infrastructure arranged by the PayFac.
This can simplify merchant onboarding because the underlying businesses may operate as sub-merchants within the PayFac structure rather than each building a conventional direct acquiring relationship from scratch.
However:
PayFac does not automatically mean Merchant of Record.
The important distinction remains who is responsible for the actual sale.
A platform can facilitate payments for its customers without becoming the seller of everything those customers sell.
Businesses comparing these models may also find our guide to Payment Facilitators and PayFac models useful.
Embedded payments are also different.
A SaaS business or software platform can integrate payment functionality directly into its product while its individual business customers remain the merchants selling to their own customers.
The platform may provide:
None of those features automatically makes the platform Merchant of Record.
For established SaaS businesses, the distinction is important because becoming part of the payments proposition does not necessarily mean becoming responsible for every underlying customer sale.
Read our guides to embedded payments for SaaS and software platforms and white-label merchant processing.
Marketplaces introduce another layer of complexity because several parties may exist within the same payment journey:
Buyer → marketplace → seller → payment provider → payout
The marketplace may control elements such as:
That does not mean every marketplace uses exactly the same Merchant of Record structure.
The legal seller, payment flow, seller agreements, tax position and provider arrangement need to be considered together.
For the payment side specifically, see our split payment gateway guide for marketplaces and platforms.
SaaS and digital-product businesses are among the businesses most likely to consider a third-party MoR.
One reason is international expansion.
A software business selling subscriptions to consumers in multiple countries may need to consider:
An MoR may consolidate some of these responsibilities into one commercial arrangement.
That can be attractive where the alternative is building significant internal tax, payments and transaction-management infrastructure.
However, businesses should compare the MoR model against the alternative:
remaining Merchant of Record themselves and building the appropriate PSP, acquiring, tax and operational infrastructure around their own business.
No.
Many businesses sell internationally while remaining Merchant of Record themselves.
A business may use a global PSP, local acquiring, multiple acquiring relationships or other international payment infrastructure without outsourcing the underlying sale.
The decision becomes more relevant when the problem you are trying to solve extends beyond accepting the payment.
For example:
This depends on the legal structure, the type of product or service, customer location and jurisdiction.
For digital services in particular, the identity of the party making the supply can affect which business is responsible for accounting for VAT.
HMRC guidance distinguishes between simply processing a payment and operating a digital platform that is treated as making the supply.
This is why the contract matters.
Do not assume that inserting a payment provider into checkout automatically transfers tax responsibility.
Businesses considering an MoR for tax reasons should obtain appropriate tax advice on the specific countries, products and contractual structure involved.
A third-party Merchant of Record commonly has greater involvement in refunds and disputes than a conventional payment processor.
However, businesses should not stop at the phrase:
“We handle chargebacks.”
Ask what that means commercially.
Establish:
The contractual allocation of the work and the contractual allocation of the financial risk are not necessarily the same thing.
This is one of the most important questions for an established business.
Before using a third-party MoR, understand what changes from the customer's perspective.
Ask:
A solution that removes operational work can still create commercial dependency.
This should be assessed before signing the contract, not when the business eventually wants to migrate.
For subscription businesses in particular, ask:
Payment portability can be particularly important for a subscription business with thousands of customers.
For more on this, read our guide to moving stored cards, tokens and recurring payments when changing provider.
It may reduce the amount of payment-card data your own systems need to handle, depending on the technical integration.
However, businesses should not assume that using an external provider automatically removes every payment-security responsibility.
PCI DSS applies to organisations that store, process or transmit cardholder data, as well as entities that can affect the security of the cardholder-data environment.
The exact scope therefore depends on how checkout, tokenisation, integrations and payment data are structured.
There is no meaningful universal MoR price.
Commercial structures vary according to factors such as:
The right comparison is therefore not simply:
MoR fee vs PSP transaction fee.
A more useful commercial comparison is:
| Third-party MoR | Remain your own MoR |
|---|---|
| MoR commercial fee | PSP/acquiring costs |
| Payment processing may be included | Gateway/processing/acquiring costs |
| Tax administration may be included | Internal or outsourced tax administration |
| Dispute administration may be included | Internal dispute-management cost |
| International infrastructure may be bundled | FX, cross-border and international acquiring costs |
| Potentially less direct control | Greater direct control but more operational responsibility |
For larger businesses, percentage-point differences in payment economics can become significant at scale.
Compare the total commercial model, not only the headline rate.
A third-party MoR may add little value if your business:
In those situations, the better solution may simply be a more capable payment provider rather than a completely different Merchant of Record model.
Do not start with the provider category. Start with the responsibility you are trying to outsource.
If the problem is simply that your existing payment provider cannot support your currencies, integrations, subscription model or international growth, changing PSP or acquiring structure may solve it.
If the problem is that the business does not want to build the tax, dispute and transaction infrastructure required to sell directly across multiple markets, a Merchant of Record becomes much more relevant.
For established businesses, we would define the desired operating model first:
Customer → seller → checkout → payment provider → acquiring → settlement → tax → refunds → disputes
Then determine which parts of that chain the business wants to own.
Before signing an agreement, establish:
For some businesses, Merchant of Record is exactly the right model.
For others, it is solving a problem that could be addressed more simply through:
If you are comparing the wider market, read our guide to comparing UK payment providers.
Businesses with bespoke payment infrastructure should also read our enterprise guide to changing payment provider with a custom API.
Important: Merchant of Record structures can have tax, contractual, regulatory and legal implications that vary by business model and jurisdiction. This article provides general payments information and is not legal or tax advice. Businesses should obtain appropriate professional advice before changing the entity responsible for customer transactions.
Disclosure: Merchant Advice Service is an independent UK business-to-business payments information, comparison and provider-matching service. MAS may receive a referral fee or commission from a partner if an introduction results in a completed account, product or service. This does not affect our editorial approach or the information provided in this guide. Provider suitability depends on the individual business and remains subject to the provider's own underwriting, pricing and terms.
Written or reviewed by Libby James, founder of Merchant Advice Service and specialist in merchant payments and complex provider requirements.