US Banking Lobby Considers Lawsuit Over OCC Crypto Charters

TheNewsCryptoPublicado a 2026-03-10Actualizado a 2026-03-10

Resumen

A US banking lobby group, the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), is considering legal action against the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) for granting national trust bank charters to cryptocurrency companies like Ripple, BitGo, and Paxos. The BPI argues that these charters, which allow crypto firms to operate as trust banks and provide custody services, could pose risks to Americans and the financial system. They claim this move blurs the definition of a "bank," increases systemic risk, and undermines the credibility of national banking charters. The BPI had previously urged the OCC to reject such applications, and while no final decision on a lawsuit has been made, the group has a history of taking legal action against the agency. Similar concerns were echoed by the Independent Community Bankers of America.

A banking lobby group hailing from the US is looking to take legal action against the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency over the agency permitting national trust bank charters to crypto companies.

An unknown source close to the lobby’s thinking has informed The Guardian that the Bank Policy Institute has plans to sue the OCC for avoiding previous warnings from banking groups and state regulators and proceeding with its revisionism of federal licensing rules to permit national trust bank charters to crypto companies.

As per the group, this could probably put Americans and the financial system at stake. Under Jonathan Gould’s leadership, the OCC permitted the first batch of conditional national trust bank charter approvals to crypto companies comprising Ripple, BitGo and Paxos, among others. Since that time, various companies have demanded similar approvals.

Hanging Sword on OCC

Once permitted, the National Trust Bank charter will grant these firms the ability to function as trust banks and provide custody and asset safekeeping services. In October, the BPI stated it was requesting the OCC to decline applications from crypto companies, comprising Ripple and Circle, as it claimed that permitting such charters could lead to risk to the financial system.

It also mentions that BPI alerts that approving this route and permitting companies to pick a lighter regulatory touch while providing bank-like products could blur the statutory boundary of what it means to be a “bank”, heighten systemic risk and highlight the credibility of the national banking charter itself.

As per The Guardian, the BPI hasn’t decided yet if it plans to pursue legal action against the OCC. Although the report mentioned that the BPI was among a group of banks that had so far taken legal action against the OCC.

The Independent Community Bankers of America issued similar warnings over the OCC’s crypto charter approvals. Lately, the ICBA requested the OCC to pull or change its proposal for issuing licences to crypto companies. ‘

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

Hyperliquid (HYPE) Jumps 9%: Can the $40 Zone Be Reached and Anchor the Bull Run?

TagsLawsuitoccUSA

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main reason the US banking lobby group is considering legal action against the OCC?

AThe banking lobby group, the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), is considering legal action because the OCC is granting national trust bank charters to crypto companies, which they believe avoids previous warnings and could put Americans and the financial system at risk.

QWhich companies were among the first to receive conditional national trust bank charter approvals from the OCC?

ARipple, BitGo, and Paxos were among the first crypto companies to receive conditional national trust bank charter approvals from the OCC under Jonathan Gould's leadership.

QWhat specific concerns does the Bank Policy Institute (BPI) have about granting these charters to crypto firms?

AThe BPI is concerned that granting these charters could blur the statutory boundary of what it means to be a 'bank', heighten systemic risk, and undermine the credibility of the national banking charter itself by allowing companies to operate with a lighter regulatory touch while providing bank-like services.

QHas the Bank Policy Institute (BPI) definitively decided to sue the OCC at this time?

ANo, as per the article, the BPI hasn't yet decided if it will pursue legal action against the OCC, though it has taken such action against the agency in the past.

QWhich other banking group has issued similar warnings to the OCC regarding crypto charters?

AThe Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) has also issued similar warnings and recently requested the OCC to withdraw or change its proposal for issuing licenses to crypto companies.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Analyzing the Impact of AI on Economic Growth and Productivity

**Title: Analyzing AI's Impact on Economic Growth and Productivity** This article examines three contrasting views on AI's influence on economic growth and productivity. **The Optimistic View** posits that AI, especially through automating R&D ("recursive self-improvement"), could dramatically accelerate growth, even triggering a technological "singularity" with explosive, potentially infinite, economic expansion. **The Moderate/Mainstream View** acknowledges AI's productivity benefits but emphasizes significant real-world constraints that could limit its impact. These include: limited cost savings per task, structural ceilings on which jobs and industries are "exposed" to AI, adoption bottlenecks (e.g., compute, energy, regulatory hurdles), and the "weak link" effect where non-automatable tasks cap overall gains. Consequently, the realized AI dividend may be far lower than optimistic projections, with estimates typically ranging from 0.1% to 1.3% annual productivity growth. **The Pessimistic View** stems from two strands. The first aligns with the moderate view but applies extremely conservative assumptions about task exposure and efficiency gains, yielding minimal projected impact. The second introduces a demand-side critique: if AI primarily replaces rather than augments labor, it could depress labor's share of income, weaken consumer demand, and create a "demand trap" that ultimately stifles growth, unless offset by redistribution policies. **The authors' assessment** is nuanced: * **Short-term (1-2 years):** AI will support growth primarily through investment spending, not significant productivity gains. * **Medium-term (3-5 years):** Three potential paths emerge based on AI demand and bottleneck severity: 1. **"Optimistic Path":** High demand, few bottlenecks. Rapid productivity gains but risk of major job displacement and social conflict without redistribution. 2. **"Moderate Path" (most likely):** High demand but significant, surmountable bottlenecks. Leads to moderate productivity gains, financial market volatility (K-shaped returns), and sectoral job losses. 3. **"Pessimistic Path":** Low demand or severe bottlenecks. Minimal productivity and growth impact, triggering financial market corrections but allowing a smoother societal transition with less labor disruption. * **Long-term:** AI holds potential for a major productivity revolution and prosperity. The conclusion stresses that no path is smooth. Technologically "optimistic" outcomes could be socially detrimental, while "pessimistic" technological diffusion might be more socially stable. Policymakers must monitor developments and prepare balanced responses to manage economic, financial, and social sustainability.

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

Analyzing the Impact of AI on Economic Growth and Productivity

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

The New Cold War is a Tech Stock War

The New Cold War is a Tech Stock War The article argues that the contemporary geopolitical and economic rivalry between the US and China represents a "New Cold War," but one fundamentally fought through technology and financial markets, not physical barriers or conventional trade. Historically, US dominance was secured through financial systems. The Soviet Union, reliant on the rigid "Transferable Ruble," was ultimately undermined by its dependency on the US dollar for oil trade. Later, Japan's semiconductor challenge was countered not just by tariffs (e.g., Plaza Accord, 301 investigations) but by binding it to US Treasury bonds. China presents a more complex, "embedded" challenger. While it holds vast dollar reserves and US debt like Japan, its industrial base is stronger and more diversified than the Soviet Union's. Surviving the initial 2018 trade war phase, the conflict has evolved into a "tech-financial war." The core battlefield is now the stock market. US tech stocks (AI, semiconductors) are treated as sovereign assets, buoyed by bipartisan national will. China is pushing to strengthen its own financial markets to convert industrial strength into financial power and fund its tech ambitions. Companies like ChangXin (semiconductors), Moonshot AI, and DJI compete not just for market share but as financial proxies for their respective systems. The new paradigm is moving from globally efficient monopolies (Apple, Google) towards companies that achieve monopolistic profits within their respective geopolitical spheres. This competition over "pricing power" and financial valuation in segmented markets defines the current era, making the stock market the primary arena for this tech-centric struggle.

marsbitHace 34 min(s)

The New Cold War is a Tech Stock War

marsbitHace 34 min(s)

RWA Weekly: Ten European Financial Institutions Establish Tokenized Asset Cooperative; Ondo Launches New Execution Network Ondo Network

RWA Weekly: European Banks Form Tokenized Asset Cooperative; Ondo Launches New Execution Network Ondo Network Covering July 24-31, 2026, the RWA sector saw a steady on-chain total value locked (TVL) of $36.8 billion, with holder count hitting a record high. However, stablecoin transfer volumes fell sharply (~30%), indicating low on-chain settlement demand. Key regulatory moves include South Korea advancing stablecoin legislation and a push to scrap crypto taxes, Kenya lowering capital requirements for stablecoin issuers, and Zimbabwe approving seven projects for its crypto sandbox. In project developments, BIS-led Project Agorá successfully tested cross-border payments with tokenized funds across six currencies. Ten major European financial institutions formed the RL1 blockchain cooperative to build tokenized asset infrastructure. Other notable updates: Aviva launched a tokenized dollar liquidity fund on XRPL, POSCO International tokenized commercial invoices on Injective, and a Brazilian farmer used tokenized cattle as collateral for a loan. Additional progress includes BNY Mellon migrating its core transfer agent operations to blockchain, Securitize gaining SEC investment advisor registration, and Tether’s compliant stablecoin USA₮ launching on Celo. Ondo Finance introduced Ondo Network, a new execution layer focused on speed and privacy, moving away from its initial chain plans. An analysis highlights that despite the growing scale of on-chain RWAs (~$32B), approximately 90% remain underutilized in DeFi, pointing to a critical challenge in unlocking liquidity and fostering real-world application beyond mere issuance.

marsbitHace 35 min(s)

RWA Weekly: Ten European Financial Institutions Establish Tokenized Asset Cooperative; Ondo Launches New Execution Network Ondo Network

marsbitHace 35 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片