[spwa4]

It is to move the burden of securing payments ("did the user actually, willingly, to the satisfaction of a court of law, initiate this payment?") onto Google and Apple.

Either the government secures internet payments themselves, which means spending now to do so, coming up with a plan, ... or they can have Apple/Google do it.

[stingraycharles]

I thought this was about identity, though, not securing payments. Isn’t that sufficiently tackled with the digital signature?

[spwa4]

It is about supporting "online cross-border transactions", in other words for providing a legally binding way for agreements to be made. This will be the basis for VISAs, proving you hold credentials (initially driving license, but will extend further), proving you've signed a contract. This MAY include a central-bank wallet with "digital Euro", or it may not, but even without, it's about money.

You can smell where this is going, no? This is how the EU is looking to make any kind of internet authentication go through them. By providing companies like telcos with an online identity that says "if a customer clicks 'buy' logged in through eIDAS and they don't pay, EU courts will if needed get the money from their homes, their mothers, sell their dog to make sure you get paid".

Then things like forcing kids off the internet, the always returning porn and copyright regulations rules and so on will follow.

[taejo]

Btw a visa is a document allowing entry into a country, while VISA is a word mark used by Visa, inc. for their payment cards and network. I think you're referring to the travel document, but since the context also includes payment networks, I'm not 100% sure.

[spwa4]

It's about contracts and official government documents, so it definitely includes payment networks, but it's certainly not limited to that.