The collaboration broadens Al Ansari Exchange’s portfolio of third-party products and extends access to Dubai’s integrated mobility payment system through the UAE’s largest branch networks. It also reflects the company’s strategy of building a connected physical and digital ecosystem that provides customers with convenient access to a wider range of everyday financial and lifestyle services.

Residents and visitors can now purchase nol Travel Cards from selected Al Ansari Exchange branches, distributed through MDX Technology Solutions ME, the RTA-authorised distributor of nol Travel Cards, providing an additional point of access to one of Dubai’s most widely used mobility payment solutions.

The nol Travel Card enables cashless payments across Dubai’s public transport network, including the Dubai Metro, Dubai Tram, public buses, marine transport and public parking. It is also accepted at more than 14,000 retail outlets across the UAE. Through the nol Pay App, cardholders can access more than 200 lifestyle offers and discounts.

Commenting on the collaboration, Musad Ibrahim Alhammadi, Director of Automated Collection Systems at Corporate Technology Support Services Sector, Roads and Transport Authority (RTA), said: “Expanding the availability of nol Travel Cards through strategic collaborations supports RTA’s efforts to make mobility services more accessible across Dubai. Providing additional distribution channels contributes to wider adoption of digital payment solutions and enhances the travel experience for residents and visitors.”

Ali Al Najjar, Chief Executive Officer of Al Ansari Exchange, added: “As customer expectations continue to evolve, we are expanding the role of Al Ansari Exchange beyond traditional financial transactions by bringing together financial, payment and everyday lifestyle services through both our branch network and digital platforms. Making nol Travel Cards available through our branches complements our broader strategy of creating a seamless customer experience while supporting Dubai’s vision for a smart, digitally connected city.”

Resilience is not only about cash reserves, backup servers or alternative suppliers. It also depends on whether a company’s legal rights and permissions still work when the business is under pressure.

By: Maroun Abou Harb, Associate at BSA LAW

Resilience is discussed as an operational or financial discipline. Businesses test liquidity, back up systems and diversify supply chains. Yet every continuity plan rests on legal infrastructure: licenses, delegated authorities, contracts, data permissions, employment arrangements, security rights and evidence.

That infrastructure can fail when needed most. The replacement supplier cannot be appointed without third-party consent. Customer data cannot lawfully be moved to the backup provider. An insurance claim is compromized by late notification. A guarantee was signed incorrectly. The company owns a platform, but not all of its intellectual property.

The most dangerous legal risk is not the missing clause. It is the right management assumes the business has, but cannot use.

In the UAE, the Central Bank’s 2026 Operational Risk Management Regulation now requires licensed financial institutions to implement a comprehensive operational risk and resilience proecedure. The principle is valuable for every company: identify what must continue, locate the legal points of failure and test them before disruption does.

1. Can the business lawfully act?

Start with corporate authority, check that licenses match actual activities, constitutional documents reflect the ownership and governance structure, and beneficial-owner, shareholder and director records are accurate. Review reserved matters, signing matrices, powers of attorney and banking mandates.

A deal, borrowing or emergency payment can stall because the authorized signatory is unavailable, a power has expired or an approval threshold was misunderstood. Group companies should confirm which entity employs people, owns assets, contracts with customers and receives revenue.

Run this scenario: if the chief executive and chief financial officer were unreachable tomorrow, who could bind the company, access its accounts and appoint an alternative supplier? If the answer is uncertain, the business has a legal single point of failure.

• Which contracts become dangerous under stress?

Most contract reviews examine value and liability. A resilience review asks a different question: what happens when performance is interrupted?

Build a heat map of critical customer and supplier contracts, ranked by operational importance and consequence of failure. For each, test termination and suspension rights, force majeure and change-in-law provisions, service levels, price-adjustment mechanisms, liability caps, indemnities, insurance, governing law and dispute forum, subcontracting, assignment and change-of-control restrictions. Check notice methods and cure periods; a valuable right can disappear if a notice is sent late or to the wrong address.

Then examine optionality, can the company use a replacement supplier, obtain transition assistance, retrieve its data in a usable format and continue using essential intellectual property? Is there a source-code escrow or step-in mechanism where appropriate?

The aim is not to renegotiate every contract. It is to know which five contracts could stop the business and to fix those first.

• Can technology fail without the legal part failing too?

A technical recovery plan is incomplete if the contracts do not support it. Cloud, payment, telecommunications and managed-service arrangements should align promised recovery times with the company’s tolerance for disruption. Audit rights, incident cooperation, subcontractor controls, data-location commitments and exit assistance should be tested.

The incident playbook must allocate legal decisions. Who determines whether regulators, customers, insurers or affected individuals must be notified? Who preserves evidence and engages external advisers? How will legal privilege or professional confidentiality be preserved? A cyber incident moves quickly; ambiguity over decision-making wastes the hours that matter most.

Conduct an exercise with management, technology, legal, communications and finance. Introduce a realistic vendor outage or data breach and follow the contracts: who calls whom, what must be notified, and what can actually be recovered?

• Does the company know what data and technology it is using?

Across the GCC, privacy and cybersecurity regimes increasingly regulate how data is collected, processed, retained, transferred and protected. A company cannot comply, or recover confidently, without knowing where its data goes.

Create a data map covering customers, employees, vendors and website users. Record the purpose and legal basis for processing, storage location, access rights, retention period, cross-border transfers and third-party processors.

The same exercise should include artificial intelligence, by identifying public and embedded AI tools, the information supplied to them, the outputs relied upon and the human review applied. Confidential information, personal data and third-party intellectual property should not enter a tool because an employee can access it. An approved-use policy, procurement review and output-verification process are proportionate safeguards.

• Can the company protect value when conditions deteriorate?

Management should monitor covenant breaches, unpaid taxes, overdue receivables, expiring insurance, threatened claims and counterparties showing signs of insolvency. The legal team should know which rights permit suspension, security enforcement, contract termination or protective court relief, and whether exercising them could create risk.

People and intellectual property also require continuity planning. Confirm that employment and consultancy terms contain appropriate confidentiality, invention-assignment and post-termination protections, tailored to the governing law. Identify key-person dependencies, succession gaps and access held by departing staff. Register intellectual property where appropriate and maintain evidence of creation and ownership.

Business needs also to review insurance as a contract, not a certificate. Map material risks to coverage, exclusions, deductibles, notification deadlines and consent requirements. The policy is only useful if the company knows how to activate it.

In brief, the output should be that for every critical risk, record the business service affected, relevant entity and contract, responsible owner, required action, deadline and escalation threshold.

Report the highest exposures to the board and repeat the exercise after major acquisitions, restructurings, regulatory changes or technology deployments.

A focused review can produce four useful assets:

1. an authority and obligations calendar;
2. a critical-contract heat map;
3. a data and AI inventory; and
4. a tested incident playbook.

No company can remove disruption. It can, however, remove the uncertainty surrounding who may act, what must be done and which rights remain available.

By Joe David, CEO of Nephos Group

“Move to Dubai for tax.”

I hear this constantly. From founders, investors, crypto-native operators – people building real businesses who reduce one of the biggest decisions of their professional lives to a single line on a spreadsheet.

And honestly, it is the wrong way to think about it.

Tax should rarely be the sole reason to relocate. When it is, it is usually where things go wrong. The corporate structure is not set up correctly. The banking relationships are not in place. The founder leaves within 18 months because the deeper rationale was never really there. I have seen this pattern play out dozens of times over the past decade, and it almost always traces back to the same root cause: a decision built on a tax rate rather than a strategy.

The tax-first trap

Dubai’s zero per cent personal income tax rate is real, and it is significant. But leading with tax creates a narrow frame that obscures the fuller picture. Founders who relocate purely for a rate often fail to consider the operational realities of building in a new jurisdiction. They underestimate the compliance infrastructure required to make the move defensible. They overlook the substance requirements that tax authorities in their home countries will scrutinise. When the expected savings do not materialise cleanly, because the structure was an afterthought, disillusionment sets in fast.

This does Dubai a disservice. It reduces a genuinely world-class business environment to a line in a tax planning brochure. The city deserves better than that, and so do the founders making life-altering decisions based on incomplete thinking.

What the successful ones actually optimise for

The founders and investors who get the most out of Dubai are not chasing a tax rate. They are making a broader strategic move.

Jurisdictional access is a major factor. Dubai sits at the crossroads of Europe, Africa and Asia, offering time zone coverage and travel connectivity that few cities can match. For businesses operating across multiple markets, particularly in digital assets, fintech and professional services, that geographic positioning is a genuine competitive edge.

Then there is the capital environment. Dubai has become a magnet for institutional and private capital, with fund structures, family offices and venture vehicles establishing a permanent presence. The banking infrastructure, while still maturing in certain areas, has improved significantly. For crypto-native businesses in particular, the regulatory clarity offered by frameworks like the Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA) provides something that many Western jurisdictions still cannot: a clear, codified path to operating legally with digital assets.

The business ecosystem itself is another draw. The speed at which you can incorporate, hire, open accounts and begin operating is remarkable compared to legacy jurisdictions. Free zones offer tailored licensing, and the government’s responsiveness to emerging sectors – AI, blockchain, tokenised finance – signals a jurisdiction that is building forward rather than regulating backward.

And then, yes, there is the lifestyle. Climate, safety, connectivity, quality of infrastructure. These are not trivial considerations when you are asking a founding team to commit to a base for the next five to ten years.

Tax is often the outcome of all of this. It is not the strategy itself.

The compliance landscape is shifting

There is another reason the tax-first mindset is increasingly risky. The global compliance environment is tightening rapidly. The Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF), developed by the OECD, will require automatic exchange of information on crypto transactions between jurisdictions. The EU’s DAC8 directive introduces similar obligations across member states. The days of relocating and assuming your home country’s tax authority will not follow are numbered.

This means that substance, genuine economic activity, real operational presence, defensible corporate structures, matters more than ever. A Dubai relocation that is purely cosmetic will not survive scrutiny. One that is built on genuine strategic foundations, with proper advisory support and compliant structures, will.

The conversation worth having

None of this is an argument against moving to Dubai. Quite the opposite. For the right founder, with the right business, at the right stage, it can be a transformative decision. But that decision needs to be grounded in strategy, not arithmetic.

Before you start calculating your tax savings, ask the harder questions. Does your business model benefit from being in this jurisdiction? Can you build genuine substance here? Are your corporate structures defensible under international reporting frameworks? Do you have the advisory infrastructure to get this right from day one?

That distinction – between tax as a tactic and strategy as a foundation – matters more than most people realise. And it is a conversation worth having before you make any decisions.

By: Avi Pardo, Co-Founder & CBO, LeapXpert

Financial firms globally have similar playbooks for off-channel communications: ban the channel, run a training, and send attestations for signing. Yet, the conversations are still happening on personal phones. Calling that playbook ‘good enough’ only hides how little has changed.

More than 100 organisations have faced charges under the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s off-channel communications initiative, while other regulators have pursued similar failures. Yet the response is still another rule, another warning, another ban.

The missing piece is the psychology behind banning. Until firms understand what drives employees towards off-channel apps, even banned ones, the next record-keeping failure is already on its way.

Why employees find workarounds

These channels are already part of the client relationship. A banker may be chasing a decision, dealing with a concern or replying to a question that has come through on Signal, WeChat or WhatsApp. In that moment, getting back to the client takes priority.

If replying through the approved channel takes too long, creates operational friction, or disrupts the conversation flow, the employee is likely to answer somewhere else. The message gets sent, but the firm may never see the full exchange.

Psychologists have studied this response to bans for decades. Jack Brehm’s work on psychological reactance shows people can push back when they feel their freedom of choice has been restricted. Research into imposed workplace change points to the same response: people who feel pushed into a new way of working may quietly find another route. Someone reads the policy, completes the training and then uses a personal phone when a client needs an answer.

Daniel Wegner’s work on ironic rebound also helps explain why bans can misfire. Tell people often enough to avoid something and it can make it more appealing. The channel remains on the phone, the client is waiting and the approved route takes longer.

Once the conversation moves to a personal phone, the firm may never recover the full exchange. Employers also face legal limits on how far they can inspect a private device.

Governance beats the workaround

Governance should redirect behaviour instead of trying to suppress it. Employees need an approved route that works while the client conversation is happening, or the workaround will keep winning.

Financial firms still need clear rules and a complete record of business conversations. Regulators expect those messages to be kept, whether they were sent by email, text, WhatsApp or another service.

The problem usually shows up during an ordinary working day: between meetings, on a journey or while a client is waiting for an answer. If the approved channel holds things up, few people will pause the conversation to sort out the process. They will reply another way.

Businesses are losing valuable conversation data

Regulatory risk is obvious when messages go missing: a firm cannot supervise what it cannot see or produce records that were never captured.

Client conversations carry information a business would want to know: a concern raised weeks before a relationship starts to slip, pricing pushback that never reaches the CRM or a salesperson handling a difficult exchange in a way others could learn from. Repeated questions may also point to problems with onboarding, service or product design.

Governed communication creates a record the organisation can learn from. Applied responsibly, conversation data can support supervision, client service, dispute resolution, coaching and a clearer view of relationship risk.
That information is already being generated every day. The difference is whether it remains scattered across personal devices or becomes something the organisation can understand and act on.

Bring the conversation back into view

Plenty of companies have the basics in place: a policy, training and an approved tool. What is often missing is a setup that matches how people work and talk to clients.

The existence of a policy says very little about whether it works. ‘Good enough’ governance can leave a business with all the right paperwork while the same behaviour carries on underneath it.

A quick exchange can soon include a shared document, a follow-up question and another colleague joining the conversation. Messages, files, participants and timing all form part of the record, which needs to stay within the firm without someone rebuilding the exchange later.

If senior leaders use the same channels they have banned for everyone else, the policy is a sham. Employees follow what leaders do, rather than what the compliance manual says. Training can help, particularly when people understand the reason behind it. But explanations only go so far if the approved route slows down a live client conversation. Technology can capture the record, but leadership decides whether people take the rules seriously. No system can rescue a policy that senior figures ignore.

Keeping those exchanges within view gives the business more than a record for compliance. It can also pick up concerns, repeated questions and early signs that a client relationship is beginning to change.

More rules have not stopped the conversations. They have pushed them onto personal phones and out of sight. Calling that ‘good enough’ is no longer credible.

Established in 2016, the partnership enables individual and corporate customers to pay for Dubai Municipality services through Al Ansari’s extensive branch network across the UAE, expanding the availability of government services.

This growth reflects strong customer adoption, the service’s operational reliability, and rising demand for convenient payment channels. The collaboration also supports Dubai’s vision for customer-centric, digitally enabled government services by connecting public services with trusted private-sector payment infrastructure.

Marking the tenth anniversary of the partnership, Sayed Ismail Al Hashemi, Acting CEO of the Corporate Support Services Sector at Dubai Municipality, said: “We highly value our decade-long partnership with Al Ansari Exchange. This collaboration has contributed to enhancing service delivery efficiency and simplifying the customer journey for the payment of Dubai Municipality fees.”

Al Hashemi added: “The partnership has had a tangible impact by improving payment collection efficiency and expanding the range of available payment channels, making our services more accessible and enhancing customer satisfaction. At Dubai Municipality, we remain committed to leveraging digital transformation to deliver smart and efficient services that enhance the quality of life and wellbeing of our customers.”

Rashed A. Al Ansari, Group Chief Executive Officer of Al Ansari Financial Services, added: “Our ten-year partnership with Dubai Municipality reflects a shared commitment to making essential services more convenient and accessible. Over the past decade, we have combined Dubai Municipality’s service excellence with our extensive network and payment capabilities to provide customers with a reliable and efficient channel for completing their transactions. We look forward to building on this strong foundation and continuing to support Dubai’s evolving smart service ecosystem.”

Building on these foundations, both organisations will explore new opportunities to strengthen the partnership and support the continued evolution of Dubai’s smart service ecosystem.

International expansion has long been seen as a milestone that signals a brand has ‘made it’. I believe that view is outdated, as behind the scenes often tells a different story. Today, expanding into new markets is not simply about increasing a company’s footprint. It needs to be done well, which in turn leads to an effective way to diversify revenue, build resilience and increase long-term enterprise value.

Across the GCC, we are seeing a new generation of founders creating businesses with global potential. The region has evolved into one of the world’s most dynamic business environments, producing brands with stronger operational foundations, more sophisticated leadership teams and products that are increasingly attracting international attention. As a result, the conversation has shifted. It is no longer about whether businesses should expand internationally, but when they should do it and how they can maximise their chances of success.

Several structural changes are driving this trend. Digital commerce has lowered many of the traditional barriers to international growth. Brands can now test demand, build communities and generate sales in overseas markets before committing to physical retail or local operations. Investor expectations have also evolved. Sustainable, well-planned growth is now valued far more highly than expansion for expansion’s sake. Investors want evidence that a business can replicate its success across multiple markets through strong financial discipline, scalable operations and a clear commercial strategy.

At the same time, recent supply chain disruptions have encouraged businesses to diversify production and reduce dependence on a single sourcing region. Many founders are therefore designing their businesses with international growth in mind from the outset, creating brands that can adapt to different markets over time.

However, opportunity should never be confused with readiness. One of the biggest mistakes I see is founders allowing ambition, and sometimes quite frankly ego, to outweigh evidence. Success in one market does not automatically translate into another. Every country has its own consumer behaviours, pricing expectations, regulations and routes to market. Assuming customers will respond in exactly the same way can become an expensive lesson.

Strong domestic performance is only one part of the equation. True readiness means having a scalable business model, healthy cash flow, resilient operations and a product that genuinely meets the needs of the target market. It also requires robust financial planning, legal and intellectual property protection, and a clear strategy for market entry.

Just as importantly, businesses need the right people around them. Local partners, distributors and experienced advisors bring invaluable market knowledge, established networks and cultural understanding. They help brands navigate complexity, avoid costly mistakes and accelerate growth. Even the strongest business can struggle if it enters a market without the right expertise on the ground.

Choosing where to expand is equally important. Too often, founders are drawn to markets that appear exciting or fashionable rather than those offering the strongest commercial opportunity. The first international market should always be selected using data, not instinct. Customer demand, competitive positioning, operational feasibility, acquisition costs and available resources should all inform the decision.

The largest market is not necessarily the best one. If competition is saturated or customer acquisition costs are too high, a smaller market with stronger commercial fundamentals may deliver far better returns. In most cases, I encourage businesses to take a phased approach, establishing success in one market before expanding further. International growth is a long-term strategy, not a race.

For design-led brands, another challenge is maintaining a consistent identity while remaining relevant to local audiences. The strongest brands never lose sight of who they are. Their purpose, quality and positioning remain consistent, while elements such as marketing, product assortment, pricing and customer experience are adapted to reflect local consumer preferences. When approached strategically, localisation strengthens relevance without compromising the essence of the brand. Authenticity, quality and consistency resonate across cultures. Those are the qualities that build trust, regardless of geography.

Digital-first expansion is also changing the way emerging brands enter new markets. For many businesses, e-commerce provides an opportunity to validate demand, build awareness and gather customer insights before making significant investments in physical retail. This reduces risk and allows founders to make decisions based on real customer behaviour rather than assumptions.

Of course, international expansion requires investment before it delivers meaningful returns. Market research, regulatory compliance, intellectual property protection, distribution, marketing, local partnerships and working capital all require careful financial planning. It is common for profitability to soften in the short term while these investments are made.

The businesses that generate the strongest long-term returns are those that enter new markets with realistic expectations, sufficient capital and a clear path to sustainable revenue. This is also where international expansion begins to influence enterprise value. Investors place significant importance on geographic diversification because it reduces risk. Businesses that rely on a single market are naturally more exposed to economic cycles, regulatory changes, geopolitical uncertainty and shifts in consumer demand. Companies that have demonstrated they can replicate success across multiple markets are viewed as more resilient and more scalable.

This is not simply about operating in several countries. Investors want evidence that growth can be repeated through disciplined execution, sound financial performance and a scalable operating model. Successfully establishing one or two international markets often provides that confidence and can materially strengthen investor interest.

It is important to also note that international expansion is not the right strategy for every business. A highly profitable company with a loyal customer base and a dominant regional position can still create exceptional enterprise value. This is particularly true for brands built around local craftsmanship, heritage or provenance, where regional focus strengthens the overall proposition. Expansion should only be pursued when it supports the long-term vision of the business and creates sustainable value.

As we look ahead, international expansion needs to become increasingly strategic and data-driven. Artificial intelligence, digital commerce and more sophisticated market intelligence will help businesses identify opportunities and validate demand before committing significant investment. At the same time, geopolitical uncertainty and supply chain resilience will remain key considerations, making thoughtful planning more important than ever.

Through my work at Morris Global Consulting, supporting hundreds of businesses entering new markets across multiple regions, one lesson remains constant. The companies that succeed internationally are rarely the ones that move the fastest. They are the ones that prepare thoroughly, make decisions based on evidence rather than assumptions, and invest in the right partnerships before taking the next step.

International expansion is not about being present in as many countries as possible. It is about building a stronger, more resilient business that is equipped for sustainable growth over the long term. When approached strategically, crossing borders does far more than open new markets. It creates lasting value.

For centuries, financial institutions relied on one advantage. Whether it was the range of their products, their pricing, or how far their services could reach. Today, those advantages are easy to replicate. Digital infrastructure is widely available, capital moves quickly across borders, and acquiring customers is increasingly automated. What now sets institutions apart is not the breadth of their offerings or the cost of their services. It is the confidence they inspire.

In a world that is increasingly more fragmented, turbulent, and cautious, trust has become one of the few advantages that cannot be replicated. Global investment patterns illustrate this shift. According to the UNCTAD World Investment Report 2025, foreign direct investment (FDI) remains far below its early 2010s peak, reflecting a world that is more risk-aware and geopolitically sensitive. The World Bank’s Global Economic Prospects also highlights uneven growth and rising uncertainty across regions. This means capital is no longer chasing the highest return; instead it is seeking predictability. And institutions that inspire trust are the ones most likely to attract it.

Capital Moves Toward Certainty

The UAE offers a compelling example. The EMIR report, supported by Qashio, Flows of Capital: Mapping the UAE’s Role as a Global Financial Gateway, shows that FDI into the country reached $40 billion, doubling from 2019 levels, and accounting for 40% of gross capital formation compared to a developed economy average of 4.3%. That differential cannot be explained by tax efficiency alone. It reflects regulatory clarity, institutional stability, and operational reliability, all of which underpin trust

The same principle is playing out at the company level.

UAE banks are increasingly pushing for founders and business owners to separate personal and corporate spending. On paper, that is a compliance issue. In reality, it signals a structural shift. Poor accounting discipline creates risk. Blurred financial lines complicate audits, funding discussions, and cross-border expansion. When investors and regulators examine financial behaviour, governance becomes visible immediately, highlighting that trust begins with discipline.

Designing Trust: Transparency, Control, Reliability

As finance becomes more digital, trust is becoming more measurable. It rests on three interlocking foundations: transparency, control, and reliability.

Transparency is now a baseline expectation. Customers want to know what they are paying, when transactions settle, and how fees are calculated. The scale of global financial flows reinforces this demand. The World Bank estimates that remittance flows to low- and middle-income countries reached $685 billion in 2024. That figure exceeds FDI and official development assistance combined for those economies. When volumes are that significant, even marginal opacity in pricing or settlement becomes economically material, making clarity a matter of cost efficiency at the system level rather than a branding exercise.

Control is equally critical. Modern finance teams operate across distributed workforces, multi-entity structures, and global vendor networks. Organisations lose an estimated 5% of revenue annually to fraud. While fraud has multiple sources, weak internal controls and policy bypass increase exposure. Giving customers direct control of their funds, through stronger controls and policies, helps reinforce trust in financial institutions.

The most resilient organisations design policy directly into their payment infrastructure. Approval hierarchies, spend limits, and permission layers are embedded into the system itself. This allows companies to move quickly without sacrificing oversight. The distinction between proactive and reactive governance is not philosophical. It determines speed, cost of capital, and investor confidence.

Reliability completes the triad. Finance is ultimately about certainty. Platforms must perform consistently. Settlements must arrive when expected. Liquidity windows must be predictable. Inconsistent infrastructure creates friction not just for finance teams, but for suppliers and partners across the value chain.

The Economics of “Free”

Digital finance has conditioned customers to expect “free” services: zero-fee accounts, no-cost cards, complimentary transfers. Yet compliance, fraud monitoring, capital provisioning, cybersecurity, and regulatory reporting all carry measurable costs. If a core financial service is offered at no charge, the obvious question becomes: how is it funded?

Revenue may come from interchange, cross-selling, float income, or data monetisation. None of these are inherently problematic. But misalignment between a provider’s revenue model and a customer’s long-term interests can erode confidence over time.

The question “How good can it be if it’s free?” is not rhetorical. It is structural. Sustainable economics enables sustained investment in compliance, uptime, and risk management. Underinvestment may not be visible immediately, but in financial services, weaknesses surface under stress.

From Compliance to Competitive Moat

Trust can no longer be viewed as a soft metric. It is measurable in capital inflows, in regulatory endorsements, in uptime statistics, and in audit outcomes. It influences valuation multiples and partnership decisions.

Institutions that deliberately design for transparency, embed control within infrastructure, and invest consistently in reliability will compound confidence over time. Those that rely primarily on aggressive pricing or superficial features may gain short-term adoption, but long-term retention is built on predictability.

In a more volatile global environment, the question facing financial leaders is shifting. It is no longer simply about how fast a product can scale or how cheaply it can be distributed. It now depends on the system’s ability to remain reliable under pressure.

From enhanced carbon capture at gas processing plants to grid modernisation and renewable energy storage, the technology reshaping the UAE’s oil and gas industry, has acquired a new dimension. As of the 2026, a significant portion of the research and development (R&D) behind it can be converted into a corporate tax credit of up to 50 percent under the country’s first dedicated R&D Tax Credit regime. According to Dhruva, a Ryan Affiliate, the opportunity for the energy sector is substantial, but the design of the regime rewards companies that act early and penalises those that treat it as a year-end exercise.

The regime was established by Cabinet Decision No. 215 of 2025 and made operational by Ministerial Decision No. 24 of 2026, issued on 18 March 2026. It applies to tax periods and fiscal years beginning on or after 1 January 2026, with the first claims expected in 2027. Credits are calculated on a tiered basis, rising from 15 percent to a headline 50 percent. Qualifying expenditure is capped at AED 5 million per qualifying entity or tax group per year, which produces a maximum credit of AED 2 million.

“The UAE’s energy transition has been told as a sustainability story and an investment story. From this year it is also a tax story. The work being undertaken to decarbonise hydrocarbon production, including enhanced oil recovery, carbon capture and storage, methane abatement, and the development of digital twins for processing plants, exemplifies the systematic, uncertainty-driven R&D that this regime is designed to reward. The catch is that the value sits in the documentation, and the documentation has to be built in real time. You cannot retrospectively reconstruct a year’s worth of R&D evidence in 2027,” said Nimish Goel, Leader, Middle East, Dhruva, Ryan LLC Affiliate.

For an industry as engineering-intensive as oil and gas, the central question is not whether qualifying activity exists. It is whether companies can tell the difference between routine engineering and genuine R&D, and prove it. Applying an established recovery method to a new reservoir does not, in itself, qualify. By contrast, systematically resolving technical uncertainty, whether relating to reservoir behaviour, materials performance under high-pressure conditions, the capture of CO₂ from sulphur recovery flue gas, or the integration of new digital control systems,  may qualify, provided the systematic experimentation and its outcomes are documented as the work is carried out.

“Two features will catch international energy companies off guard. Only R&D performed inside the UAE qualifies, and subcontracted R&D counts only when it is carried out by UAE-based third parties. Much of the sector’s historical R&D has run through global technology centres and group affiliates abroad. Companies will need to look hard at where their R&D actually physically takes place, before they assume they qualify,” said Fran Wilhelm, Associate Partner, Dhruva, Ryan LLC Affiliate.

The regime’s defining feature is a dual threshold that links the credit rate to both qualifying spend and headcount. The first AED 1 million of qualifying spend earns 15 percent and requires at least two R&D staff on average; spend between AED 1 million and AED 2 million earns 35 percent and requires at least six; and spend between AED 2 million and AED 5 million earns the top 50 percent rate and requires at least fourteen. Both conditions must be met for each band. Where the headcount falls short, the claim drops back to the highest band where both the spend and the staffing tests are satisfied. A minimum of AED 500,000 of qualifying expenditure applies to each R&D project.

This is where oil and gas companies face a structural choice that other sectors may not. R&D in the industry is often capital-intensive rather than people-intensive: a single carbon capture or enhanced oil recovery pilot can absorb millions in equipment and consumables while employing only a handful of dedicated researchers. Under the dual threshold, that profile caps the credit at the lowest band regardless of how much is spent. Reaching the higher rates means building R&D headcount physically in the UAE.

Pre-approval from the Emirates Research and Development Council is mandatory before any credit can be claimed, with no exceptions. No pre-approval means no credit, however strong the underlying scientific or technological uncertainty. Businesses must keep detailed technical records of objectives, methods, experiments and outcomes for at least seven years. The credit is also currently non-refundable, so it benefits companies that have a corporate tax or top-up tax liability to offset, which describes most established producers and service contractors in the sector. That said, it has been suggested that Phase 2 may include a refundable credit and an increase in both application and generosity, meaning all businesses should start planning ahead, irrespective of their tax position.

“Companies that map their qualifying projects now, secure pre-approval and build the evidence trail through the 2026 financial year will capture real value when claims open in 2027. Those that wait will find that the spend was eligible but the proof was never created. In this regime, the documentation is the asset,” concluded Nimish Goel.

Stefan Deiss, CEO and Co-Founder, The Hashgraph Group

The Middle East has moved faster on digital identity than almost any other region in the world. The UAE Pass now connects residents to more than 5,000 government and private services. Saudi Arabia’s Absher platform has issued over 28 million unified digital IDs. Dubai has gone fully paperless across 45 government entities.

But these systems were built for a world where the main challenge was convenience: getting citizens online, reducing paperwork, speeding up access to services. The threats they were designed to handle were stolen passwords, forged documents and basic impersonation.

What they were not built for is an environment where artificial intelligence can generate a convincing human face in seconds, clone a voice from a few minutes of audio, and inject a synthetic video feed into a verification check in real time.

What distributed ledger technology actually adds

Most digital identity systems today are centralised. Your credentials sit in a government or enterprise database, and every time your identity needs to be checked, the system queries that database. Sometimes that means scanning your face against a stored biometric template. Sometimes it means pulling up your document records and cross-referencing them. Either way, the process depends on one central store of information being secure, accurate and available.

The model works until it doesn’t. A single database holding millions of identities is a high-value target. An attacker who gets in does not compromise one person. They compromise everyone. And the tools available to attackers are improving fast.

The GCC fraud detection market has reached $1.2 billion. Deepfake attacks on identity systems are surging globally. In May, the Saudi Data and Artificial Intelligence Authority published updated deepfake guidelines that explicitly recommend blockchain-based provenance systems to establish traceable records of original content. The guidelines identify identity impersonation through cloned voices and facial simulations as a major risk, and single out finance, politics and identity verification as sectors requiring priority monitoring.

This is the context in which distributed ledger technology becomes relevant. Decentralised identity flips the conventional model. Instead of credentials sitting in someone else’s database, you hold them yourself, in a digital wallet on your device. When you need to prove something, you present only the specific credential required. The verification is recorded on a distributed ledger, a shared record maintained across a network of independent computers rather than controlled by any single organisation. Nobody owns it, can alter it, and shut it down.

Then there are zero-knowledge proofs. This is a way of proving something is true without revealing the underlying information. You could prove you are over 18 without showing your date of birth. You could prove you hold a valid professional licence without disclosing your name or address. The verifier gets the confirmation they need. You keep everything else private.

There is no single database to breach. The individual controls what information is shared and with whom. And every verification event is recorded permanently, creating an audit trail that regulators, enterprises and individuals can each trust independently.

In Sharjah, decentralised identity infrastructure has been integrated across a smart city ecosystem, making it one of the first urban environments in the world where residents, buildings and services interact through digital credentials rather than centralised databases.

The physical presence problem

There is a further gap that even well-designed digital identity systems do not currently address: physical presence.

Identity verification today confirms who someone claims to be remotely. It checks documents, runs facial recognition, performs biometric matching. What it cannot confirm is that a real human being is actually sitting in front of the screen. A synthetic face, a cloned voice and an injected video feed can sail through remote checks that were designed for an era when faking a human was genuinely difficult. That era is over.

The technology to close this gap exists. Ultra-wideband radar, the same short-range spatial sensing found in consumer devices, can detect physical presence with sub-10-centimetre accuracy. It can pick up vital signs such as breathing and heartbeat as a liveness check. When that presence event is cryptographically bound to a decentralised identity credential and recorded on a distributed ledger, the result is a tamperproof record proving a specific individual was physically present at a given location at a given time, verifiable by any authorised party without exposing personal data.

The applications stretch across sectors. In transport, a traveller approaching a gate at an airport or train station could be verified instantly: identity confirmed, physical presence proven, the event recorded permanently. The same logic applies to stadiums, conferences, concert venues and any gated environment where ticket fraud is a problem.

Why the Middle East is the right place for this conversation

The UAE government has announced its intention to transition 50 per cent of federal sectors and services to agentic AI within two years. When AI agents begin autonomously processing licences, permits, compliance checks and cross-border transactions, the question of who authorised what, and whether a human was genuinely involved at the point of decision, becomes critical. Without a verifiable link between a physical person and a digital action, agentic AI systems become vulnerable to impersonation at a scale that manual fraud teams cannot monitor.

The region also has structural advantages that most other markets do not. Governments in the Gulf are bringing policy, investment and technology deployment together under unified national strategies. Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030, the UAE’s digital economy strategy targeting 20 per cent of non-oil GDP by 2030, and the broader push toward smart city infrastructure all create an environment where new identity infrastructure can move from concept to deployment far faster than in markets weighed down by legacy systems and fragmented regulation.

What comes next

The digital identity systems the Middle East has built over the past decade are genuine achievements. But they were designed for a world where the person on the other end of a verification check was assumed to be real. That assumption is becoming less reliable every quarter.

The next generation of identity infrastructure needs to do three things. It needs to remove single points of compromise by decentralising how credentials are stored and verified. It needs to give individuals control over their own data through zero-knowledge proofs and selective disclosure. And it needs to prove physical presence at the moment of verification, closing the gap that synthetic media is already exploiting.

About the Author:
Stefan Deiss is Co-Founder and CEO of The Hashgraph Group (THG), a Swiss-based Web3 and AI technology engineering company specialising in enterprise solutions built on the Hedera network.

Stefan brings over two decades of experience in technology and business transformation. He spent 11 years at Orange Business Services before moving to Zurich Insurance Group, and went on to found his own consulting firm in 2013. In 2016, he co-founded The Hashgraph Group, which today operates globally with offices across Switzerland, Abu Dhabi, Hong Kong, and beyond.

Under his leadership, THG has developed a suite of enterprise products including TrackTrace for EU Digital Product Passport compliance, IDTrust for decentralised digital identity, and EcoGuard for sustainability and carbon markets. He is also co-inventor of CITI (Continuous Identity Trust Infrastructure), a patent-pending cryptographic framework that binds physical presence to digital identity.

Qashio, the MENA region’s leading spend management solution, is rewarding its UAE customers with exclusive FIFA World Cup 2026 fan experiences, including premium viewing access, interactive competitions, and hospitality benefits at Emirates Golf Club’s Footy Central in Dubai. The initiative gives customers the opportunity to experience a dedicated football watch party destination during the world’s biggest football tournament.

Running from 11 June to 19 July 2026, Footy Central will screen live matches alongside themed F&B, interactive games, family-friendly activities, competitions, and matchday entertainment. The programme builds on the global appeal of football’s premier event, which reached more than five billion viewers across all platforms during its previous edition, and reflects Qashio’s value proposition beyond spend management by turning client loyalty into tangible rewards and premium benefits.

The campaign will unlock exclusive access to selected matchday rewards and fan activations for Qashio customers, including F&B vouchers, matchday credits, Viya Points, gaming rewards, and VIP hospitality experiences. Viya Points, the digital reward currency within the Viya App ecosystem, can be redeemed across a premium lifestyle network of 400 venues, extending the value of the campaign beyond the matchday.

Guests can participate in the Ronaldo Header Challenge, where they can test their heading accuracy, while the FIFA Console Zone will host the PS5 FIFA Esports Challenge: Road to the Cup, with guests competing in head-to-head matches for leaderboard positions and daily rewards. Half-time engagement will include lucky draws during key matches, alongside Predict & Win competitions that reward guests for accurate match predictions.

Armin Moradi, CEO and Founder of Qashio, said: “Football is the most popular sport in the UAE among both Emiratis and the broader expat population, which makes the FIFA World Cup 2026 a powerful moment to celebrate with our customers. Qashio was built to help businesses manage spend with more control and value, and this campaign extends that promise by turning loyalty into memorable experiences for finance leaders and teams across the country.”*

The FIFA World Cup 2026 customer rewards campaign reflects Qashio’s broader approach to building a spend management platform that combines financial control with meaningful customer engagement. Through rewards, activations, competitions, and hospitality benefits, Qashio is continuing to create value for businesses beyond transactions, while giving customers new ways to engage with one of the most anticipated sporting events in the world.

For more information on the Footy Central experience and partnership opportunities, visit the link.