OCC bank charters for crypto firms defended against Warren's regulatory claims
In brief
- Chamber of Digital Commerce defended OCC's nine national trust bank charter approvals granted since December 2025.
- Senator Warren accused OCC of violating National Bank Act and demanded full applications by June 1.
- Federal trust charters permit custody and trust services but prohibit deposit-taking and lending.
- Chamber argues federal OCC oversight provides stronger consumer protection than state-level licenses.
Warren's Challenge
Senator Warren accused the OCC of improperly granting the charters, claiming the agency allowed crypto companies to sidestep stricter banking regulations. Warren's letters, dated May 18 and 19, demanded full applications, internal communications, and records of Trump administration involvement, with a deadline of June 1, 2026. She also accused the OCC of violating the National Bank Act.
The rapid pace matters. Nine charters since December 2025 represents accelerated approval activity. Ripple National Trust Bank received conditional approval on December 12, 2025, followed by Circle's First National Digital Currency Bank on the same day. Coinbase National Trust Company received its charter on April 2, 2026.
What These Charters Actually Do
National trust charters permit limited fiduciary activities, allowing firms to handle custody and trust services, but not to take deposits or make loans like a traditional bank. The distinction matters for both regulation and competitive positioning.
Cody Carbone, CEO of the Chamber, framed the approvals as consistent with the direction Congress has been moving. He argued that federal oversight aligns with legislative intent:
"if Congress is actively building a regulatory structure for stablecoin issuers and digital asset custodians, it would be contradictory for the OCC to pull back on chartering the very firms those laws are designed to govern." — Cody Carbone, CEO of the Chamber of Digital Commerce
The Chamber also pointed to the GENIUS Act, bipartisan legislation targeting stablecoin regulation, as evidence that federal lawmakers want crypto firms operating within a recognized framework.
Competitive and Regulatory Implications
Federal oversight through the OCC provides a more consistent and rigorous regulatory baseline than the patchwork of state-level money transmitter licenses that most crypto firms currently operate under, the Chamber argued. This framing reframes the charters as consumer protection rather than regulatory arbitrage.
As more firms gain federal trust bank status, firms without charters may find themselves at a disadvantage when competing for institutional clients who require federally supervised counterparties. That dynamic could reshape which crypto firms attract institutional capital and partnerships over the next year.
