IMFPA vs AMA (Agency/Mandate)
IMFPA is a commission payment instruction between intermediaries. AMA is the principal-mandate agreement that gives one party authority to act.
At a glance
| Criterion | IMFPA | AMA (Agency/Mandate) |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Fix and pay commission | Authorise a mandate to represent the principal |
| Parties | Paymaster + beneficiaries | Principal + mandate |
| Fee mechanism | USD per unit at LC drawdown | Percentage or fixed retainer |
| Third-party payments | Yes, to multiple beneficiaries | Direct principal to mandate |
Use AMA (Agency/Mandate) when
Use the AMA when a mandate needs formal authority to negotiate and execute on behalf of the principal.
Get the AMA (Agency/Mandate) template →IMFPA vs AMA (Agency/Mandate): Key Differences
IMFPA is a commission payment instruction between intermediaries. AMA is the principal-mandate agreement that gives one party authority to act.
Numerical Example: IMFPA vs AMA (Agency/Mandate)
IMFPA is a commission payment instruction between intermediaries. AMA is the principal-mandate agreement that gives one party authority to act.
Use Case(IMFPA)Use the IMFPA to lock the intermediary commission chain.
Alternative(AMA (Agency/Mandate))Use the AMA when a mandate needs formal authority to negotiate and execute on behalf of the principal.
Best ChoiceDepends on your specific needs
Source: SSLT Global Editorial - IMFPA vs AMA (Agency/Mandate)
Last reviewed: October 2026
FAQ
Can a mandate be both an AMA holder and an IMFPA beneficiary?
Yes. Many mandates hold AMA for authority and IMFPA for commission on the same trade.
Which one do banks look at?
Banks look at IMFPA when it becomes a payment instruction on the LC. AMA is commercial only.