National Trust Charters For Crypto Under Fire—Senator Warren Says It Goes Beyond The Law

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-05-19Última atualização em 2026-05-19

Resumo

Senator Elizabeth Warren is challenging the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's (OCC) approval of national trust bank charters for crypto companies. She argues that approvals for firms like Ripple, Circle, BitGo, Fidelity, Paxos, and Coinbase appear to go beyond the limited activities permitted by law, potentially violating the National Bank Act. Warren warns that allowing crypto firms to engage in bank-like activities—such as lending and payments—without equivalent regulations could threaten consumer protection and financial system stability. Traditional banks have also objected to the OCC's approach. In defense, OCC Comptroller Jonathan Gould stated that including new entrants promotes competition, modernization, and benefits consumers and the broader industry.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is taking a new aim at the crypto industry, now challenging how the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has handled national trust bank charters for digital asset firms.

Her latest concern centers on the OCC’s approvals—some granted on a conditional basis over recent months—at a time when the conventional banking sector has already been raising objections throughout the year.

Warren Challenges OCC On Crypto Charters

Bloomberg reports that Warren’s argument is that at least some of the companies appear to be “seemingly ineligible” for the type of charter they are receiving.

In her letter to Jonathan Gould, the head of the OCC, the Senator said the regulator has approved at least nine national trust charters for crypto companies that, in her view, “appear to go far beyond the narrow set of activities permitted by law.” Warren went further, describing what she sees as an “apparent violation of the National Bank Act.”

Among the approvals mentioned are those granted to crypto giants such as Ripple, Circle (CRCL), BitGo, Fidelity, and Paxos in December of last year.

Others, such as Coinbase (COIN), received conditional approval from the OCC to establish Coinbase National Trust Company. Around the same timeframe, Kraken’s parent company, Payward, also filed an application seeking approval for a National Trust Company charter.

Those approvals would allow these companies to manage and hold assets on behalf of customers—an arrangement that could speed up payment settlement compared with older processing timelines.

However, Warren’s critique is not only about what the trust charters allow today, but also about where she believes some firms may be headed next.

OCC’s Defense

Per the report, the Massachusetts Democrat argued that some companies are trying to move past traditional custody and into business areas that look more like banking operations. That includes activities such as lending, payments, and running trading platform-type services.

In her view, easing rules for trust companies this year could effectively enable crypto firms to broaden their financial activities too far, without the same level of constraints and oversight that typically apply to banks.

Warren framed the concern as follows: if crypto firms are permitted to engage in bank-like businesses without “the same regulations and safeguards,” it could create problems for consumer protection and for overall stability in the financial system.

Yet, the Senator is not the only critic of the OCC’s approach. Traditional banks have voiced their own apprehension throughout the year, arguing that the OCC’s approvals stretch the historical intent behind the national trust bank charter.

The OCC, through Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould, has defended its actions. Last year, Gould emphasized that bringing new entrants into the federal banking system could improve competition and deliver additional products and services.

From his perspective, the OCC’s approach is beneficial for both consumers and the broader banking industry, and it supports modernization rather than regulatory dilution.

The daily chart shows the total crypto market cap dropping to $2.5 trillion on Tuesday. Source: TOTAL on Tradingview

Featured image created with OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is Senator Elizabeth Warren's main criticism regarding the OCC's approval of national trust bank charters for crypto firms?

ASenator Elizabeth Warren's main criticism is that the OCC has approved at least nine national trust charters for crypto companies that, in her view, appear to go far beyond the narrow set of activities permitted by law, describing it as an 'apparent violation of the National Bank Act'. She is concerned these firms may be moving into bank-like operations without the same regulations and safeguards, posing risks to consumer protection and financial stability.

QWhich major crypto companies received national trust charter approvals from the OCC as mentioned in the article?

AThe article mentions that approvals were granted to crypto giants such as Ripple, Circle (CRCL), BitGo, Fidelity, and Paxos in December of last year. Additionally, Coinbase (COIN) received conditional approval, and Kraken's parent company, Payward, filed an application for a similar charter.

QWhat activities, according to Senator Warren, are some crypto companies with trust charters trying to expand into that resemble traditional banking?

AAccording to Senator Warren, some crypto companies are trying to move beyond traditional custody services and expand into business areas that look more like banking operations. These include activities such as lending, payments, and running trading platform-type services.

QHow has the OCC, specifically Comptroller Jonathan Gould, defended its decision to grant trust charters to crypto firms?

AThe OCC, through Comptroller Jonathan Gould, has defended its actions by emphasizing that bringing new entrants into the federal banking system could improve competition and deliver additional products and services. Gould believes the approach is beneficial for consumers and the broader banking industry, supporting modernization rather than regulatory dilution.

QWhat is a key concern shared by both Senator Warren and traditional banks regarding the OCC's crypto trust charters?

AA key concern shared by both Senator Warren and traditional banks is that the OCC's approvals for crypto firms stretch the historical intent behind the national trust bank charter. They argue it could allow these firms to engage in bank-like businesses without being subject to the same level of constraints, oversight, and safeguards that typically apply to banks, potentially creating systemic risks.

Leituras Relacionadas

Who Funds the Agents?

**Summary: Who Funds AI Agents?** OpenAI recently shut down a feature allowing AI agents to shop for users, highlighting the challenge of creating a secure and regulated environment for agent-driven transactions. While payment infrastructure exists, a crucial governance layer—defining spending limits, fraud detection, tax handling, and return policies—is largely missing. The potential is enormous: AI agents already processed $73M across 176M transactions last year, with McKinsey forecasting this could grow to $3-5T in global consumer commerce by 2030. The core competition isn't just about processing payments, which can be very cheap (especially with crypto-based settlement), but about controlling the rules that govern agent spending. Key players like Stripe and Coinbase are racing to dominate this governance layer. Stripe's acquisition of wallet provider Privy allows it to set spending policies, identity checks, and human-in-the-loop approvals directly at the wallet level. Similarly, Coinbase's stack, including its x402 protocol and AgentKit, embeds governance rules. This vertical integration across settlement, wallet, and governance layers is becoming the dominant strategy. Control over the governance layer is where significant future value lies. If agents handle trillions in transactions, even a small fee for managing compliance, fraud prevention, and policy enforcement could generate billions in annual revenue. The companies that successfully integrate across the payment stack will capture value from idle agent balances, transaction fees, and governance services, positioning themselves as the foundational banks of the AI agent economy.

marsbitHá 20m

Who Funds the Agents?

marsbitHá 20m

A Nation Blocks Chips, a Giant Buys a Nuclear Power Plant: Why It's Time to Seriously Consider DeAI

**Title: Great Powers Blockade Chips, Giants Buy Nuclear Plants: Why It's Time to Seriously Consider DeAI** In May 2026, the US closed loopholes for Chinese firms to acquire advanced NVIDIA chips via overseas subsidiaries. That same month, Kenya halted a $1B geothermal data center project involving Microsoft, fearing its immense energy consumption. Meanwhile, Huawei announced mass production of its Ascend AI chip. These disparate events underscore a new reality: the competition for computing power ("compute") has escalated beyond the tech industry, becoming a geopolitical and infrastructural battleground. A new era of oligopoly is forming, with control over the AI stack—from GPU chips (NVIDIA) and cloud platforms (AWS, Azure, Google Cloud) to foundational models (OpenAI, Anthropic)—concentrating in a few Western "AI Octopus" corporations. This centralization creates systemic risks: pricing power and platform lock-in for users, infrastructure fragility, and a widening "compute divide" that threatens to marginalize nations without independent AI capacity. An "AI Iron Curtain" is deepening through export controls. In response, some nations like Saudi Arabia and the UAE are investing heavily to buy compute power, aiming to transition from oil to AI economies. The EU seeks to triple its compute capacity by 2030 to reduce dependency. However, the spending gap is vast, with four US tech giants alone planning ~$750B in AI capex for 2026. The race is increasingly constrained by energy, with AI tasks consuming up to 1000x more power than web searches, pushing firms to even acquire nuclear plants. This landscape is fueling interest in Decentralized AI (DeAI). It proposes a third way: using open protocols to coordinate a global network of idle GPUs, independent developers, and data centers, creating an AI infrastructure without a single controlling entity. Leveraging blockchain and cryptographic verification, DeAI aims to break market concentration, disperse energy demands, reduce geopolitical dependencies, and enhance transparency. While still nascent in performance and stability, DeAI's core promise is not immediate superiority but providing a crucial alternative architecture to resist monopoly, censorship, and centralized power. As specialized AI hardware costs fall and open-source models flourish, the window to build this foundation is open. The very existence of such competition serves as a vital check against the inevitable abuse of concentrated power.

marsbitHá 1h

A Nation Blocks Chips, a Giant Buys a Nuclear Power Plant: Why It's Time to Seriously Consider DeAI

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片