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

bitcoinistОпубликовано 2026-03-09Обновлено 2026-03-09

Введение

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

Связанные с этим вопросы

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.

Похожее

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

**Summary: The Value Distribution of Stablecoins** The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from mere trading tools into broader channels for dollar access. It divides the stablecoin ecosystem into four layers to analyze how value is distributed: 1. **Issuance Layer:** Mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the spread between reserve yield and user costs (e.g., Tether, Circle). This layer currently earns the largest profit margin. 2. **Infrastructure Layer:** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and asset management (e.g., Bridge, BVNK). This is the "unglamorous" but critical work, building the essential bridges between crypto and real-world finance. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer:** Integrates stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and provides enterprise financial software (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase). They act as the access point for businesses. 4. **Application Layer:** The end-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlements, or as a store of value. They benefit from convenience but have little pricing power. The core thesis is that while the issuance layer currently dominates profits, the often-overlooked **infrastructure layer holds significant long-term potential**. The real challenge and barrier to mass adoption is not the on-chain transfer of stablecoins (which is simple), but the complex "last mile" integration into existing business workflows, banking systems, and regulatory frameworks across different countries. Companies in this layer are currently in a "land grab" phase, investing heavily to build networks, secure bank partnerships, and establish compliance pathways. While their position is currently pressured by the profitable issuers above and distribution platforms below, the article suggests that if stablecoins become a default financial rail for businesses, the infrastructure providers who have done the hard work of integration will ultimately gain strong pricing power and become entrenched, essential players.

marsbit1 ч. назад

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

marsbit1 ч. назад

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from a mere trading tool into a broad "dollar channel." It analyzes the industry's value chain through four layers: 1. **Issuance Layer (e.g., Tether, Circle):** The top layer that mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the thickest interest rate spread. 2. **Infrastructure Layer (e.g., Bridge, BVNK):** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling critical but complex "dirty work" like fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and cross-border settlement. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase):** Embeds stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and integrates with enterprise software. 4. **Application Layer:** End-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlement, or storing value. The author posits that while the issuance layer currently captures the most profit, the most overlooked and potentially critical layer is infrastructure. The core challenge for stablecoin adoption isn't the on-chain transfer (which is simple), but bridging the gap between blockchain and the real-world financial system. This involves solving practical problems for businesses: fiat conversion, reconciliation, tax handling, and user onboarding. Infrastructure companies are currently in a difficult "land-grab" phase—building networks, securing banking relationships, and achieving compliance country-by-country. They face pressure from both the profitable issuance layer above and distribution platforms below. However, the author suggests this layer is building a crucial moat. Once stablecoins become a default business rail, the infrastructure players who have done the hard work of integration may gain significant, durable value and pricing power.

链捕手1 ч. назад

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

链捕手1 ч. назад

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

No one truly teaches you how to do research. You're often given a desk, a pre-selected problem, and vague instructions to "create something new." Consequently, many people reverse-engineer the job based on visible outputs—papers, posts, announcements—learning only how to *appear* like a researcher rather than how to *become* one. True research capability is built from stacking small, trainable skills, nearly all of which can be developed through deliberate practice. **Pick Your Own Problem:** Most researchers absorb problems from advisors or trends, lacking the underlying reasoning. Choosing a problem you genuinely care about, as John Schulman advises, leads to original work. Develop "taste" like a muscle: predict experiment outcomes, guess paper results from methods, and track which findings remain important over time. **Upgrade Your Inputs:** Relying on shared reading lists (arXiv hot lists, filtered group chats) leads to unoriginal conclusions. Undervalued old literature often holds crucial insights (e.g., MoE, LSTM, backpropagation). Richard Sutton's "The Bitter Lesson" or Claude Shannon's 1952 talk on creative thinking are more predictive than lengthy modern surveys. Breadth matters as much as depth: draw from neuroscience, mechanism design, hardware knowledge, and honest statistics. Read papers directly, especially appendices and limitations sections. **Write Everything Down:** As Paul Graham noted, writing exposes flaws in seemingly mature ideas. Writing is the cheapest defense against self-deception. Following Feynman's principle, Darwin programmatically wrote down facts contradicting his theory to combat memory bias. Maintain a detailed log of hypotheses, setups, predictions, results, and updated understandings. Reviewing past logs fosters essential humility.

marsbit4 ч. назад

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

marsbit4 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片