Financial Institution Regulation

Subscribe to Financial Institution Regulation via RSS

On May 8, 2025, the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (“CSBS”) asked the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”)  to comply with Executive Orders 14129 and 14267 by reversing its regulations governing national bank preemption.[1] Executive Order 14129 directed federal agencies to rescind unlawful regulations,[2] and Executive Order 14267 directed federal agencies to reduce anti-competitive regulatory barriers.[3] If the OCC had adopted the position advocated by the CSBS, it could have opened the door to state-level oversight of national banks and federal savings associations, likely resulting in a more fragmented regulatory landscape, where national banks face varying rules across different states. But the OCC refused to change course. The federal government has recently pursued deregulatory policies on multiple fronts, and the OCC’s position on preemption effectively limits state banking regulators that might otherwise seek to apply stricter regulatory requirements on national banks and federal savings associations.Continue Reading OCC Reaffirms that its National Bank Preemption Regulations are Lawful

On May 20, 2025, the Senate cleared procedural obstacles to consider the GENIUS Act on the Senate floor. Originally introduced on Feb. 4, by Senator Bill Hagerty, R-TN, along with Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott, R-SC, Kirsten Gillibrand, D-NY, and Cynthia Lummis, R-WY, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins of 2025…

On May 7, 2025, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) issued a follow up to its July 2020 Interpretative Letter 1170, which allowed national banks to provide cryptocurrency custody services to their customers.[1] The May 7 letter (Interpretive Letter 1184)[2] further clarified that banks can buy and sell cryptocurrency at the custody customer’s direction and outsource cryptocurrency custody and execution services.[3] But in contrast to the OCC’s clear confirmation that banks can provide cryptocurrency custody services, the guidance for safe and sound practices for those services remains murky.Continue Reading Banks May Provide Cryptocurrency Transaction and Custody Services, but OCC Has Yet to Provide Clear Compliance Requirements

On March 17, 2025, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) announced that it conditionally approved a fintech business model for CenTrust Bank, N.A.’s (“CenTrust”), an Illinois based community bank chartered by the OCC.[1] CenTrust was acquired by SmartBiz Loans, which is a fintech company that provides an online platform to connect small business owners with lenders providing Small Business Administration (“SBA”) loans. Following the acquisition, CenTrust applied to change its business model to incorporate the SmartBiz Loans’ business model of providing SBA loans nationwide.Continue Reading Another Fintech Company Acquires a National Bank Charter through Merger

On September 24, 2024, California enacted Assembly Bill 2863 (the “Bill”) to take effect on July 1, 2025.[1] The Bill updates California’s regulations governing automatic renewals and continuous services. An automatic renewal or continuous service (“auto renewal contract”) is defined as a contract that renews automatically at the end of a definite term or becomes a payable contract after a free trial period.[2] The Bill continues the state trend of expanding regulations to protect California consumers when enrolling in subscriptions.[3]Continue Reading California Enacts New Bill to Strengthen Customer Protection on Automatic Renewals

On October 11, 2023, President Biden, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan, and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Rohit Chopra announced the latest developments in the government’s efforts to tackle junk fees. Junk fees are hidden, surprise fees imposed on customers without clear disclosure.[1] The CFPB and FTC have taken several measures to crack down on junk fees since early 2022, including:

  • On January 26, 2022, the CFPB issued a request for information regarding fees that consumers believed to be covered by a baseline price, unexpected fees, and fees that seemed too high or unclear.[2]
  • On March 23, 2023, the FTC proposed a “click to cancel” provision requiring sellers to make it easier for consumers to cancel their recurring subscriptions and memberships.[3]
  • On June 22, 2022, the CFPB issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to address excessive credit-card late fees. [4] On February 1, 2023, the CPFB issued a proposed rule limiting and capping late fees.[5]
  • On June 29, 2022, the CFPB issued an advisory opinion affirming that “pay-to-pay” fees that are not authorized by the original loan violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). “Pay-to-pay” fees are those that are imposed on consumers who want to make a payment in a particular way.[6]
  • On July 23, 2022, the FTC proposed a rule to ban junk fees and bait-and-switch tactics for car buyers.[7]
  • On October 20, 2022, the FTC published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to crack down on junk fees, seeking comments on unnecessary charges, unavoidable charges, and surprise charges.[8]
  • On October 26, 2022, the CFPB issued guidance stating that imposing surprise bounced-check or overdraft fees are likely to be unfair and unlawful.[9]
  • On October 11, 2023, the CFPB published a Supervisory Highlights special edition covering junk fees in the areas of bank accounts, auto-loan servicing, and remittances that were identified during CFPB examinations between February and August 2023. The CFPB claims to have recovered and is refunding $140 million back to impacted customers.[10]

Earlier this week, the CFPB released an advisory opinion on fees related to consumers requesting information on products and services, and the FTC proposed a new rule banning hidden fees and bogus fees.Continue Reading The FTC and CFPB Announce New Rules to Tackle Junk Fees

In the wake of Silvergate’s collapse, Silicon Valley Bank entering receivership and another bank following in SVB’s footsteps, startups and other companies directly affected by these events are struggling to manage their payroll and other obligations while credit facilities are frozen. Although depositors likely will be fully protected and most businesses can expect to avoid…

In December 2022, California’s new commercial lending disclosure law and complementary regulations went into effect, leading the way for other states to follow.

The new California law imposes disclosure requirements in commercial lending transactions. While this is not new for consumer lenders that are accustomed to complying with the Truth in Lending Act, this is uncharted territory in the commercial lending space. Like the federal Truth in Lending Act, the new California law is meant to provide prospective borrowers with an opportunity to see a concise summary of the obligation’s terms in an easy-to-read format. Ideally, this allows a prospective borrower to take the terms offered by two or more lenders and compare them, side by side, to determine the best offer.Continue Reading California Leads the Way on Commercial Lending Disclosures

On December 15, 2022, the Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) issued a lengthy Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to implement beneficial ownership information (“BOI”) access and safeguards provision of the Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”) (the “Access NPRM”).  The Access NPRM provides a framework by which authorized recipients may access BOI, providing different tiers of access for agencies and financial institutions who may seek this information in connection with anti-money laundering efforts.Continue Reading FinCEN Issues Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Access to Beneficial Owner Information

On October 13, 2022, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”) announced multiple enforcement actions against former employees of several financial institutions because the former employees made false statements to obtain economic injury disaster loans and grants from the U.S. Small Business Administration (“SBA”) or paycheck protection loans from SBA-approved lenders.  The loans and grants were made available to small businesses who were suffering from the impact of COVID-19 and needed emergency financial assistance authorized by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (P.L. 116-136, the “CARES Act”). Continue Reading Federal Reserve Exercises Broad Disciplinary Authority to Sanction Former Bank Employees Who Committed PPP Loan Fraud