Big Banks Threaten To Sue OCC Over Crypto Rules, Citing Threats To Financial Stability

bitcoinistPubblicato 2026-03-09Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-09

Introduzione

Major US banks, led by the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), are threatening to sue the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) over its approval of federal trust charters for crypto firms. They argue that the OCC's streamlined licensing process, which has approved firms like Ripple, Circle, and Fidelity, releases these companies into the financial system without the stringent oversight applied to traditional banks. Banking groups warn this blurs the definition of a "bank," creates a regulatory loophole, and poses significant risks to financial stability, consumer protection, and competition. The opposition is also supported by state regulators and smaller banking groups.

The traditional banking sector in the United States is reportedly intensifying its opposition to crypto firms and considering a potential lawsuit against the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) over federal licenses granted to these companies.

According to a Monday report by The Guardian, the Bank Policy Institute (BPI) is evaluating its legal options after the OCC did not respond favorably to repeated warnings from influential banking groups and state regulators concerning its reinterpretation of federal licensing rules.

Banks Demand Action Against OCC’s Crypto Licenses

Since President Donald Trump took office, the OCC has streamlined the process for crypto firms and fintech startups to acquire and operate under a national bank trust charter, which allows them to serve customers in all 50 states.

This resulted in conditional bank charters being approved for five major crypto firms, including Ripple, Circle (CRCL), BitGo, Paxos, and Fidelity, back in December of last year.

However, traditional banks express concern that this approval effectively releases these firms into the broader financial system without the stringent oversight and controls that fully-fledged banks undergo.

In October, the Bank Policy Institute publicly urged the regulator to reject license applications from notable crypto and blockchain companies, including Circle, Ripple, and the London-based payment firm Wise.

The BPI, which counts banking leaders such as Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan, Brian Moynihan of Bank of America, and David Solomon of Goldman Sachs among its board members, cautioned that granting lighter regulatory frameworks to firms offering bank-like services could blur the lines defining what constitutes a “bank.”

This, they argued, could exacerbate systemic risk and undermine the integrity of the national banking charter. Currently, the BPI is contemplating whether to initiate legal action against the OCC.

Smaller Banks And State Regulators Also Push Back

The Guardian also reported that the OCC’s approach to crypto has also faced resistance from smaller banking groups and state regulators.

The Conference of State Bank Supervisors, which represents regulators from all 50 states, sent a letter to the OCC last month arguing that granting regulatory approval to crypto and payment firms would compromise competition, consumer protection, and financial stability.

Similar concerns were echoed by the Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA), an organization representing approximately 5,000 smaller banks.

The ICBA warned that the current proposals to issue licenses to crypto companies would create a “loophole” in core banking regulations and raise serious public policy concerns about consumer safety and the overall stability of the financial services sector.

The daily chart shows the total crypto market cap at $2.33 trillion as of Monday, March 9. Source: TOTAL on TradingView.com

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com

Domande pertinenti

QWhy are big banks threatening to sue the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)?

ABig banks, represented by the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), are threatening to sue the OCC because they oppose the federal licenses granted to crypto firms. They argue that these licenses allow crypto companies to operate like banks without undergoing the same stringent oversight, which they believe poses a threat to financial stability and undermines the integrity of the national banking charter.

QWhich major crypto firms received conditional bank charters from the OCC?

AAccording to the article, the OCC approved conditional bank charters for five major crypto firms: Ripple, Circle (CRCL), BitGo, Paxos, and Fidelity.

QWhat specific concerns does the Bank Policy Institute (BPI) have about the OCC's actions?

AThe BPI is concerned that granting lighter regulatory frameworks to crypto firms offering bank-like services blurs the definition of a 'bank,' exacerbates systemic risk, and undermines the integrity of the national banking charter.

QWhich other groups, besides the large banks, are pushing back against the OCC's crypto licensing?

ASmaller banking groups and state regulators are also pushing back. The Conference of State Bank Supervisors and the Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) have expressed concerns that these licenses compromise competition, consumer protection, and financial stability.

QWhat was the total crypto market cap mentioned in the article as of the report date?

AThe daily chart in the article shows the total crypto market cap was $2.33 trillion as of Monday, March 9.

Letture associate

No Sales Team, $20 Million in Revenue: How Did AI Employee Viktor Win Over 30,000 Companies?

The AI employee Viktor, developed by a team with DeepMind background, has achieved $20 million in annual revenue without a traditional sales team, serving over 30,000 companies. Its core innovation lies in positioning itself as a "Tier 3 AI Coworker" capable of "end-to-end execution and delivery of results," moving beyond the "draft and wait for human completion" model of typical AI assistants. Users can simply mention Viktor in Slack or Microsoft Teams using natural language commands, and it autonomously performs tasks like pulling sales data from a CRM, generating reports, or even cross-tool operations like creating board meeting PPTs by aggregating data from six different sources. Key to its growth is a pure Product-Led Growth (PLG) model, eliminating complex implementation cycles and per-seat licensing. Instead, it charges based on task credits or consumption, lowering the trial barrier with a $100 free credit offer and no credit card required. This enabled viral, bottom-up adoption within organizations. Viktor's interaction paradigm removes the barrier of prompt engineering, allowing non-technical employees to delegate complex workflows seamlessly. It also features proactive, automated task execution (e.g., overnight bookkeeping, scheduled reports) based on triggers, effectively embedding AI as an automated "process layer" within business operations. However, its expansion into Microsoft Teams—a platform with 320 million users—highlights challenges. Large enterprises require stringent IT compliance, security reviews (e.g., SOC 2), and governance, potentially hindering the frictionless, user-driven adoption that succeeded in Slack. Additionally, the "black box" nature of its autonomous decision-making raises concerns about operational risks, data integrity, and the need for robust audit logs and permission controls. Balancing efficiency gains with security and trust remains a critical hurdle for Viktor and similar AI agents aiming to become core enterprise infrastructure.

marsbit18 min fa

No Sales Team, $20 Million in Revenue: How Did AI Employee Viktor Win Over 30,000 Companies?

marsbit18 min fa

Manus Buyback Plan Emerges: Chinese Investors Plan to Repurchase Equity with $2 Billion, Path to Hong Kong IPO Becomes Clearer

According to a report by The Information, early Chinese investors of Manus, including Tencent, Sequoia Capital China, and ZhenFund, are planning to repurchase the company from Meta for $2 billion—the same price Meta paid in its acquisition last December. This move is a direct response to the Chinese government's prohibition of the foreign acquisition in April. As part of the repurchase plan, Manus is considering establishing a Sino-foreign joint venture within China. This structure is seen as a way to ensure regulatory compliance for its Chinese investors and to pave the way for a future IPO in Hong Kong. Notably, U.S. investor Benchmark will not participate in the buyback, which will concentrate ownership even more among Chinese capital. Since its acquisition by Meta, Manus's business has grown rapidly, with its annualized revenue run rate reportedly increasing four-to-fivefold to $400-$500 million in roughly six months. This strong growth underpins the investors' willingness to repurchase at the original price. Financially, the forced unwinding of the deal may benefit the early investors, allowing them to regain equity at a cost far below the company's current implied valuation, with the added prospect of an independent future listing. However, specific terms of the repurchase, including funding proportions and the joint venture's equity structure, are still under negotiation. This "repurchase-joint venture-Hong Kong IPO" approach could serve as a reference model for other Chinese AI startups navigating cross-border M&A regulations.

marsbit45 min fa

Manus Buyback Plan Emerges: Chinese Investors Plan to Repurchase Equity with $2 Billion, Path to Hong Kong IPO Becomes Clearer

marsbit45 min fa

STRC Loses Peg by 11%, Can Strategy's Perpetual Motion Machine Keep Running?

The article discusses the significant and concerning depegging of MicroStrategy's (MSTR) preferred stock, STRC. Designed to trade near its $100 target par value, STRC has recently fallen sharply, reaching a low of $83.26 and closing at $88.59, representing an over 11% discount. STRC is a core component of MicroStrategy's financial strategy. As a perpetual preferred stock, it allows the company to raise capital through an "at-the-market" (ATM) issuance program without diluting common shareholders (MSTR). This capital is primarily used to purchase Bitcoin, creating a "capital flywheel": issuing STRC → raising cash → buying BTC → increasing net assets → supporting STRC's value. The flywheel's operation depends on STRC maintaining its $100 price. To enforce this, MicroStrategy employs a dynamic dividend mechanism, recently raising the rate to 11.5% and increasing payout frequency. However, this has failed to halt the depegging, indicating market concerns extend beyond yield. Analysts cite two main reasons. First, technical factors like forced liquidations from leveraged arbitrage trades may have exacerbated the sell-off. Second, and more fundamentally, is waning confidence in MicroStrategy's financial resilience. A JPMorgan report highlighted the company's limited cash relative to its ~$1.7 billion annual dividend obligation, raising liquidity concerns. While MicroStrategy counters that its massive Bitcoin holdings provide decades of coverage, this argument relies on the potential need to sell BTC—a departure from its long-standing "never sell" narrative. The company's recent sale of a small amount of Bitcoin for "testing," despite being framed as minor, has intensified these fears. The persistent depegging threatens to cripple MicroStrategy's primary funding channel. If STRC remains discounted, the company's ability to fund further Bitcoin purchases weakens. Should cash reserves dwindle while financing is constrained, the market may increasingly price in the risk of MicroStrategy becoming a forced seller of Bitcoin to meet obligations. This shift from a major marginal buyer to a potential seller could pose significant downside risk to the broader Bitcoin market.

链捕手54 min fa

STRC Loses Peg by 11%, Can Strategy's Perpetual Motion Machine Keep Running?

链捕手54 min fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片