MT799 Proof of Funds Verbiage Guide

“MT799 proof of funds” is a market phrase, not a formal banking product. MT799 is a SWIFT FIN free-format message type used for bank-to-bank narrative communication. The content is policy-driven, qualified, and typically limited to procedural confirmation rather than a payment undertaking.

If a counterparty is trying to treat an MT799 as a substitute for a documentary credit, a standby, a demand guarantee, or an escrow structure, the transaction is already drifting away from standard execution. This guide explains what MT799 verbiage typically states, what it avoids, and how to request a message that is operationally useful without creating unintended liability.

Financely is an advisory firm. We are not a bank and we do not transmit SWIFT messages. We do not provide proof of funds or bank instruments. We support clients by structuring finance requests, aligning documentary requirements, and coordinating execution through regulated counterparties under their own approvals, KYC and AML, sanctions screening, and definitive documentation. The examples below are educational and illustrative only.

What “Proof of Funds” Usually Means In A Bank Context

In legitimate workflows, “proof of funds” is a request for comfort around capacity and process, not an enforceable promise. Banks generally distinguish between: (1) relationship confirmation, (2) process confirmation, and (3) a binding undertaking. MT799 verbiage is typically confined to the first two categories, and even then it is often framed as information only.

Relationship Confirmation

A bank confirms it maintains a relationship with a named customer, subject to confidentiality and policy. This is low liability and commonly accepted.

  • Often no balances disclosed
  • Usually requires client consent if the customer is named
  • Useful for early-stage counterparty comfort

Process Confirmation

A bank confirms it is reviewing a request (for example, issuance of an LC or standby) subject to KYC, underwriting, and internal approvals.

  • Non-binding by design
  • Typically includes explicit qualifiers
  • Useful for coordinating parallel diligence timelines

What MT799 Verbiage Typically States

MT799 verbiage is normally drafted to communicate context and process while preserving legal and operational boundaries. The receiving bank reads it as a narrative communication, not as a credit instrument.

What MT799 Verbiage Typically Avoids

Banks usually avoid language that a counterparty could argue is a binding assurance of payment, solvency, or funds control. A request that reads like a guarantee often triggers refusal, escalation to legal, or a heavily diluted response.

Statements That Create Liability

  • “Funds are blocked” or “funds are reserved” without a documented account control structure
  • “Funds are free and clear” or “unencumbered” as a blanket statement
  • Commitments to transfer funds on a future date without definitive agreements
  • Any sentence that resembles “we undertake to pay” (that belongs in an LC, SBLC, or guarantee)

Balance Disclosures

  • Exact balances, average balances, or “minimum balance” claims
  • Account statements by narrative message rather than formal documentation channels
  • Disclosures without explicit client consent and internal approvals

Illustrative MT799 Verbiage Fragments

The fragments below reflect common drafting patterns. They are not a SWIFT template and should not be treated as a copy-paste instruction. In practice, banks use house formats and insert their own qualifiers.

A Practical Way To Frame The Request To Your Bank

The fastest path to an acceptable message is a narrow request that aligns with what banks are willing to state. A “prove funds are blocked and transferable” request is not narrow, and it often collapses into weeks of back-and-forth.

Inputs To Provide

  • Receiving bank name and BIC, plus the recipient team if known
  • Transaction purpose in one sentence and a reference number
  • What you want confirmed: relationship or process status
  • Written client consent for any disclosure beyond existence of relationship

Outputs To Accept

  • Information-only qualifier and non-reliance language
  • “Subject to approvals” language as standard
  • No balance disclosures unless your bank explicitly agrees
  • No “blocked funds” language unless you have a real control structure documented by the bank

When You Should Use A Different Tool

If the counterparty needs a binding undertaking, the correct tool is not an MT799 narrative. The correct tool is the instrument that carries an undertaking, supported by the right documentary conditions and a defined execution path. Examples include documentary credits under UCP 600, standbys under ISP98, demand guarantees under URDG 758, or a properly documented escrow or pledged deposit structure.

FAQ

Is MT799 verbiage a promise to pay?

No. A payment undertaking belongs in a documentary credit, standby, or guarantee. MT799 is typically used for informational bank-to-bank communication, and banks normally include qualifiers that prevent reliance.

Can MT799 verbiage confirm “blocked funds”?

Banks generally do not treat an MT799 as the instrument that creates or proves legal encumbrance. Funds control is documented through account control, pledged deposits, escrow arrangements, or bank instruments, all subject to the bank’s documentation and approvals.

What is the most defensible request?

A limited bank-to-bank message confirming relationship or confirming that a request is under review, subject to KYC, sanctions screening, and approvals. It supports coordination without drifting into an implied guarantee.

Request A Quote

If a counterparty is requesting MT799 proof of funds verbiage, share the exact wording they requested, the transaction purpose, the parties, the timeline, and what the message is meant to accomplish. We will revert with an execution-focused approach and a compliant communications pathway through regulated counterparties.

Request A Quote

Disclaimer: This page is for general information only. It does not constitute legal, tax, regulatory, investment, or credit advice and it is not an offer or solicitation. Financely is not a bank and does not send SWIFT messages. MT799 messages are transmitted only by banks through SWIFT and are subject to bank policy, confidentiality obligations, and internal approvals. Any financing or instrument issuance is provided solely by regulated counterparties under their own documentation and approvals, and is subject to due diligence, KYC and AML review, sanctions screening, and execution of definitive agreements.