As AI-driven infrastructure investment accelerates across North America, senior bankers gathered at a GTR roundtable in New York in December 2025 to examine how trade and working capital finance is supporting data centres, critical minerals and reconfigured supply chains. From inventory finance and contract monetisation to digitisation and the Basel Endgame, the discussion explored how clients are increasingly demanding holistic liquidity, risk and working capital solutions that bridge traditional product boundaries.
Roundtable participants
- Geoff Brady, global head of trade and supply chain finance, Bank of America (host and chair)
- Dyanne Carenza, head of trade finance, global business payments and global banking, Scotiabank
- Heather Crowley, global head of trade and working capital product, JP Morgan
- Antonio Federico, head of trade and working capital sales, North America, Citi
- João Galvão, head of transaction banking corporate sales, Americas, Standard Chartered
- Alban Miranda, global head of FI distribution and portfolio management, BNY
- Caryn Pace Messenger, portfolio head of trade and supply chain finance, Bank of America
- Jonathan Richman, head of US trade finance and working capital sales, Santander
- Michael Stitt, head of trade and working capital origination, US Bank
Brady: Let’s start with the topic of clean energy, semiconductors and critical minerals, and the assumption that a greater share of our economy in North America for the next few years is going to be related to the growth of AI, data centre buildouts, supply chain management, etc. How will we accommodate that, and what new financing opportunities are emerging from the boom in AI and data-driven infrastructure?
Richman: In our business of trade and working capital, there’s nothing like a new growth area that requires a lot of set-up costs and scarce resources to make everyone realise just how important supply chain management is for corporates to succeed.
There’s a tremendous amount of activity to scale up investment, to find new trading partners, and to make sure that, as a corporate, you can secure vital supplies and energy resources.
And all of this is resulting in us having a bigger role in terms of providing traditional trade services, whether that’s letters of credit, supply chain finance or receivables finance. But we are also seeing a need for more flexible, newer solutions like inventory finance to secure those vital supplies and to have buffer stock that didn’t exist before, especially for chips.
We’re having a lot of conversations around contract monetisation, especially because you have some very large, very creditworthy offtakers. And then at the opposite end of the spectrum, there are suppliers who are much less creditworthy and much more in need of flexible and affordable finance. And this is where we, as trade bankers, step in and bridge that gap. It’s complex, but our role is bigger than ever.
Brady: What has been the impact of this new landscape on supply chains? Have clients behaved differently with the movement in supply chains over the last five years?
Crowley: Re-shoring and ally-shoring have become a theme, as where you typically source your goods from may no longer be the most cost efficient. People are looking for those opportunities. We saw imports of a lot of goods come into the US very quickly to beat the tariffs, which drove an increase in inventory finance discussions. Clients are looking to us not to answer the question of what Trump will do next, but how we can support their response – rerouting of supply chains in industries such as commodities, for example.
Carenza: We’ve seen a lot more volatility in the last nine to 10 months than there had been for a while. But we’ve seen shifts as a result – there are statistics showing that for the US, Mexico is now the largest trading partner, where it was China for many years. We’re certainly seeing those supply chain diversification and offloading trends.
There are trade agreements, some of them on the table for renegotiation right now, that have facilitated those flows. Collectively, the three economies in one of the larger blocs – the US, Canada and Mexico – have all benefited in particular industries. It will be interesting to see, when we meet again next year, what has happened with the next round of negotiations.
To the point that it’s no longer about the lowest-cost provider, as trade financiers in those markets, we’re helping clients through the peaks and valleys of adjusting costs. The resiliency piece is key. Our clients are willing to pay a little bit more, and perhaps lower their margins, because they want that trusted network and they want to solidify supplier relationships so they can source and provide the end product to their clients.
Federico: Across key global trade corridors, volumes have effectively doubled over the past five years, reflecting a structural shift in global trade. As a result, clients are seeking deeper, more credible banking partnerships – not only in trade, but also across liquidity, payments, FX, and other financial services.
“Our clients are willing to pay a little bit more, and perhaps lower their margins, because they want that trusted network and they want to solidify supplier relationships so they can source and provide the end product to their clients.”
Dyanne Carenza, Scotiabank
Brady: As you think about the capitalisation of this expanded tech economy, and the merger between trade finance and project finance, particularly in respect to the AI data centre build-out, have you had to be more coordinated with other parts of your organisation over the last 18 or so months?
Galvão: Absolutely. This is what we are looking at: how to organise ourselves better internally, because we are going to see a lot of demand in power, energy and water.
But we are also seeing a new market in real estate. Big new tech companies are going to build more data centres across the US, and who is going to provide these funds? It will be private capital as well, not just banks, so that will involve distribution teams.
I see more internal connectivity across different areas to provide one single solution for the client. Clients don’t want multiple pieces. They want to see the entire flow and understand how a particular bank can be a complete financial provider. That is my concept of success for the next three to five years: how we can be more complete for the client.
Federico: That’s exactly what we are seeing. Clients are increasingly looking for partners who can support their full investment agenda over the next three to five years – not only short-term working capital, but also solutions across trade finance, liquidity management, capital markets and other verticals.
Everything is interconnected. Operating in silos no longer works. Trade solutions cannot be developed in isolation from the broader banking ecosystem. This requires strong internal coordination, as well as close collaboration with investors and insurance providers to mobilise additional capital.
Expanding capital capacity allows us to deliver greater liquidity and deploy balance sheet more efficiently. Pricing will also be part of this conversation, as clients need to understand the cost of building and sustaining this new environment.
Galvão: The trend towards vertical integration in supply chains is becoming increasingly evident across various markets. What’s also becoming increasingly apparent is that financing these structures on a single-bank basis is quite ambitious. Adopting a more coordinated, multi-bank approach enables the industry to better meet the scale and complexity of these needs.
This is a unique opportunity in terms of demand for finance that I personally haven’t seen in my career. We all hear the numbers about trillions of dollars in direct investment, and that is absolutely what we will need, across working capital, export credit agency finance, long-term finance, contract monetisation and so on, at scale. It is very exciting in terms of what’s coming in the next few years.
Miranda: The rush to build data centres is real, but few have cracked the code on monetisation. At BNY, we take a pragmatic approach. By leveraging guarantees and partnering with multilateral development banks, we help clients navigate this evolving landscape with confidence.
In today’s environment, resilience matters more than pure cost efficiency, even as tariffs remain a reality. That’s why we focus on solutions that optimise working capital and make every dollar work harder, so you can stay ahead, no matter the challenge.
Carenza: On the notion of coming together, clients really do appreciate it when you come to them with a holistic view. We’ve been going in with our virtual card solutions and securitisation, and we present a holistic payable solution: strategic vendors, the long tail, all packaged together. That resonates, and with infrastructure investments, it will go to an even greater level.
Economists are changing forecasts for 2026 in terms of growth potential, and the US, Canada and many other markets have announced major infrastructure projects to facilitate data centres and mining. These are the big areas for sure.
Pace Messenger: At Bank of America, we’ve created a strong internal partnership between global capital solutions and the trade and working capital side. The hyper-scalers are dependent upon a small cohort of suppliers.
Apart from capital raising, inventory management and supply chain resilience, that inverted pyramid requires the most connected advisory lens. It necessitates coordination internally across the bank, and we’re excited to support our clients on this new journey.
Brady: A question for everyone: are our trade products sufficiently defined such that there is a delineation between when a working capital solution would fit in the trade finance organisation, versus project finance, export finance, or a more generic capital raise? If not, should that line be drawn and where?
Richman: My answer is no, in a positive way. The world is changing so rapidly that the uses of trade finance are evolving with it. We talk a lot about capex – it used to be short-term working capital, and now we’ve found uses for our products that help clients deal with multi-year, medium-term situations.
We’ve also looked at the integration of different areas: how project finance complements trade finance, securitisation techniques being integrated with receivables finance and other traditional trade products to create new and better solutions. I’ve seen more opportunities to work with our cash and payments team than I had before. The challenge of delineating and defining is greater, but the opportunity to do it right is much better.
Stitt: I think the biggest roadblock is the different cultures inside institutions. In terms of collaboration, we’ve done the same with virtual cards at US Bank, and it’s been wildly successful.
When you start talking about cross-project finance, getting all these teams to interoperate and see the client solution as the goal, people get it intellectually, but the challenge is getting leadership behind it. It’s difficult and can be exhausting, but the effort is worth it. And if the clients demand that kind of solution, it becomes much easier internally to mobilise resources.
“The rush to build data centres is real, but few have cracked the code on monetisation.”
Alban Miranda, BNY
Brady: In our observation, it’s usually been the investors who have instigated or demanded internal collaboration within an institution. Now, however, we’re starting to see clients ask for it and seeing the benefits of a holistic solution. Has that changed the behaviour of the banks at all?
Stitt: I can’t speak directly to that for global institutions, as we’re not working on some of these big projects, but on a smaller scale, it does help. The corporate relationship manager for the client can start advocating internally.
I’m always willing to escalate – or rather, elevate – to say: here’s the strategic opportunity for the firm. If we bring in the whole firm, let’s find what the client needs, what the solution should be, who’s really good at that, and let’s partner with them. And I’m not talking about fintechs here; I mean primarily other financial institutions.
Crowley: I think clients have taken us further on that. It’s not just about bringing the whole solution from a sales perspective, but technology-wise, they want one embedded solution, and it’s up to us to build it into their ERP so they can just activate and go live.
Clients don’t just want to be sold a product in a cohesive manner; they want one seamless implementation. The bank does all the work: SAP updates, Oracle upgrades – that’s for the bank; the client’s technology team shouldn’t have to handle it.
As clients go through spin-offs, mergers and integrations, we now help them navigate that. Scaling this requires thinking three to five years ahead: where will the client go with all these innovation ideas, and how do we bring it together from a tech perspective?
Some products are very different, and that conversation is separate. You’re not going to tie your export credit agency solution into this. But for payables or receivables, how do we create it so they don’t have to prioritise a tech project internally to get working capital? That’s now on us.
Pace Messenger: Simplification and removing friction remain the goals, and the technology and digitisation landscape will continue to raise client expectations.
Richman: It’s client-driven today, much more than ever before. The reason is fundamental: 20 or 30 years ago, trade finance was a fairly peripheral activity for most corporates, handled by a junior person in treasury. Today, we are much more C-level, certainly treasurer-level. It’s strategic for many companies.
Clients look to us to help with basic liquidity, but also strategically, to build competitive advantage in their supply chain and manage trading partners. It’s a whole different game, demanding different types of solutions and a different way of working to deliver the best outcome.
Galvão: There is also a fundamental difference now: time is more of the essence for our clients. There is a race, and this helps explain why clients are driving this discussion and why they are willing to go for a unified solution. Deadlines are a key question: how long will it take to deliver this? It is much more top of mind for clients.
Miranda: BNY operates under a platform operating model that organises work around end-to-end client journeys. Teams are structured as cross-functional pods leveraging agile delivery, with clear ownership of technology assets, operational readiness and shared capabilities.
This model enables us to rapidly respond to market signals and evolving client needs. We build on a common, API-first platform foundation, integrating reusable services and data-as-an-asset principles. From there, we continuously extend the platform to deliver new features and experiences aligned with client expectations.
Brady: I’m interested in hearing how you’re handling the recent activity in the US with the accelerated buildout of the tech and data centre sectors, and how that’s led to an inverted pyramid of the supply chain – a small group of buyers pursuing the same resources and raw materials from the same and limited number of suppliers. Are those suppliers asking the buyers for different trade finance-type solutions? Are you seeing clients asking for, for example, inventory finance alongside whatever the bid would be?
Galvão: Only to a certain extent. Inventory finance has been discussed for the last 10 years, but many clients are not sufficiently educated. I have spent months discussing inventory finance, only to end up stalled with the accounting team. You can only push so far.
I don’t see inventory finance as a solution for more than probably 10% of a portfolio, and it is very sporadic. However, if you can standardise the solutions that work, there are some common financing approaches that resonate well with these large suppliers.
Richman: I agree it is the most complex offering in our toolkit today. The sales and implementation process is lengthy and has many hurdles. But we would have said the same about supply chain finance 20 years ago. The need for any form of liquidity can be catalysed by a crisis.
“Inventory finance has been discussed for the last 10 years, but many clients are not sufficiently educated. I have spent months discussing inventory finance, only to end up stalled with the accounting team.”
João Galvão, Standard Chartered
Inventory finance delivers liquidity and a significant value proposition – in my view, greater than supply chain finance. I believe it will become much more pervasive than it is today. The data centre build-out could well be one of the catalysts for this to really gain wide acceptance across different sectors.
Carenza: It could also vary by industry, similar to when you see a first mover, and then companies benchmark themselves against one another. I think there will be some patience required until we see those first movers in specific sectors, and then replication will follow.
Galvão: Time will tell. But pricing remains a deterrent for inventory finance. Because most of us want to do inventory finance for investment-grade names, and those investment-grade names usually have a cost of funding that raises questions for me.
Federico: Inventory finance is likely to become increasingly relevant for different sectors and industries. After the pandemic-driven expansion of supply chain finance, we are now seeing a shift toward financing and protecting inventory itself, driven by supply constraints and a more complex geopolitical environment.
Brady: What do you expect from the forthcoming Basel Endgame rules in terms of trade finance? Could it make US lenders more competitive with European peers? Could it spur innovation in risk distribution and partnerships with non-bank funders?
Richman: My view, from a European bank perspective, is that there is some impact, mostly around loss given default (LGD) harmonisation. I feel the effects from a trade finance perspective are manageable, and most of our clients shouldn’t feel too negatively impacted.
Additionally, these changes are a continuation of the theme from the last few years. We’ve all been distributing more because it’s the only way to be price competitive and deliver the capacity clients require. That will continue, and this may ratchet it up slightly, but it’s essentially a continuation of the same theme.
Carenza: The recent proposals signal a single-digit outcome in terms of increase, which is much better than prior proposals and helps hedge against imbalances compared to other regulatory bodies. That’s a positive outlook vis-à-vis calibrating where we were before.
Stitt: From our perspective, we’ve been on standardised capital for a long time, so it’s already baked in. That’s already included in our return models, so I don’t see much impact. From a product standpoint, we’ve already taken the pain, so I don’t see it as a plus or minus necessarily.
Brady: Let’s move on to technology and digitisation. Does the momentum we’re seeing in trade finance mean that technology is now more of an issue than ever? And how far along do we think the industry is on the trade technology journey?
Richman: There is a strong drive to use technology to become more efficient in managing risk and in making proposals and pitches. The challenge we all face is that, as an industry, legacy systems remain. There are still antiquated processes involving paper, different legal systems, multiple parties and a lot of complexity.
“Clients don’t just want to be sold a product in a cohesive manner; they want one seamless implementation. The bank does all the work: SAP updates, Oracle upgrades – that’s for the bank; the client’s technology team shouldn’t have to handle it.”
Heather Crowley, JP Morgan
The ‘Holy Grail’ of end-to-end digitised solutions has been elusive in our industry. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t making progress. We’ve seen progress in specific activities internally and in delivering one-to-one solutions for clients and service providers.
There are niche areas where we are delivering embedded finance, sometimes with fintechs or other third parties, including buy-now-pay-later solutions and inventory finance. Will there ever be full industry-wide nirvana? I’m not sure it will happen in my career, but this is how you begin.
Stitt: One of the bigger impediments is the legal environment. For example, Article 12 of the Uniform Commercial Code is coming in New York, but implementation details are unclear. The concept of an electronic bill of exchange is a no-brainer to us commercially, but to an attorney, it’s like kryptonite. You can’t get there from here unless you’re willing to take on more risk.
Crowley: The biggest opportunities are where we can control the ecosystem. I agree that requiring all parties on a transaction to use the same system is extremely difficult, that’s why so many fintechs fail at scale.
Where we’ve realised real benefits is internally, in our back office. We can have hundreds of people use digitisation consistently, realising efficiency gains. That’s where trade organisations can make digitisation work today. We can move the industry forward, proving we can go end-to-end and distribute.
Then externally, structured embedded solutions where we invest strategically have been powerful. And we’ll continue to invest in AI.
Miranda: You can’t be everything to everyone, and at BNY, we focus where it matters most for our clients. Technology adoption starts with practical solutions that deliver real value. For example, our Trade Network Access Service (TNAS) helps unlock trade opportunities, safely and efficiently with 24/7 portal access and 4,000-plus relationship management applications (RMAs).
TNAS connects clients’ letter of credit (LC) flows to counterparties you can’t reach directly, reducing RMA overhead, broadening global access, and improving supply chain liquidity.
We’re also leading in AI adoption, with nearly universal integration across our teams. From streamlining LC processing and compliance checks to fraud screening, onboarding, and issue resolution, AI helps us turn unstructured data into actionable insights. This means fewer routine tasks and more focus on solving complex challenges for clients.
Our AI capabilities extend to trade services, using large language models to analyse documents, build checklists and improve processes. By partnering with fintechs, we accelerate innovation and open new pathways, helping clients access niche solutions and market opportunities faster.
Crowley: The interesting part with AI is that, in the past, you could spot a fraudulent LC because it looked too clean. Now, AI is making fraudsters smarter. Fraudulent documents can look just like regular LCs. AI is helping us gain efficiency, but it also makes fraud harder to detect with the human eye.
Carenza: The real advantage of digitisation and AI is in how we bring an integrated solution to the client. We leverage APIs to connect clients in many ways. Any one fintech platform has scalability limits, but the API world helps us align better.
We also leverage AI and data when learning to monitor client patterns. For example, we can prompt clients when payments from a supplier are unusual, helping them anticipate renewals or investments of surplus liquidity. It’s about providing a holistic view for treasurers and their teams.
“To capture the full potential of the digital landscape and leverage data, digital capabilities need to be built in from inception. If we were to reimagine solutions from scratch with today’s technology, that would be the hopeful outlook.”
Caryn Pace Messenger, Bank of America
Galvão: We just finished implementing ISO 20022, which will give us richer information, standardisation, and the ability to use machine learning to detect patterns. This is a reality the industry will experience over the next year or so.
Like Bill Gates said, we often underestimate the long-term impact of transformation and overestimate the short-term. We’re now seeing some of these impacts starting to bear fruit.
Pace Messenger: It’s incumbent upon the trade industry to embrace a mindset shift. Many existing trade products were born in an analogue world, and simply overlaying technology won’t untap their true value.
To capture the full potential of the digital landscape and leverage data, digital capabilities need to be built in from inception. If we were to reimagine solutions from scratch with today’s technology, that would be the hopeful outlook.
