Original author: ChandlerZ, Foresight News
According to a March 9 report by The Guardian, the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), an industry group representing 40 major U.S. banks including JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Citigroup, is seriously considering suing the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) to prevent it from issuing U.S. bank trust charters to cryptocurrency companies and fintech startups. If the lawsuit proceeds, the longstanding conflict between traditional banking and the crypto industry over financial access will formally escalate into legal confrontation.
83 days, 11 companies, a race for licensing
The trigger for the event can be traced back to December 2025, when the OCC conditionally approved trust bank charters for five crypto-native companies in a single batch: Circle, Ripple, BitGo, Paxos, and Fidelity Digital Assets. This marked the first time a federal regulator granted such charters to crypto companies in a single batch.
A wave of applications quickly followed. According to FinTech Weekly, 11 companies submitted applications for a trust bank charter within 83 days, including crypto and fintech firms such as Crypto.com, Bridge (Stripe’s stablecoin subsidiary), and Zerohash, as well as traditional financial giants like Morgan Stanley. In February 2026, Crypto.com received conditional approval, just about four months after submitting its application.
More controversially, World Liberty Financial, a crypto company affiliated with the Trump family, also submitted a similar license application in January, planning to establish World Liberty Trust Company to directly issue its USD1 stablecoin. Senator Elizabeth Warren pressured the OCC over concerns regarding foreign ownership and conflicts of interest in the application, urging a delay in approval, but was rejected by OCC Comptroller Jonathan Gould.
The opposition camp continues to grow.
BPI is not the only voice of opposition. A multi-layered coalition of opposition has now formed around the OCC's policy.
The Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS), representing regulatory agencies from all 50 U.S. states, has taken a firm stance. Its chair, Brandon Milhorn, publicly stated that the OCC is piecing together a "Frankenstein charter," repurposing a narrow charter originally intended for trust activities into a backdoor to full-scale banking. He also explicitly noted that "litigation is certainly a possibility," and that states will consider administrative and legal actions if the OCC’s charter expansion exceeds the boundaries of the National Bank Act.
The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA), which represents 5,000 community banks, also expressed strong opposition, arguing that these new license holders would compete directly with traditional banks under a more relaxed regulatory framework, creating an unfair market environment.
The American Bankers Association (ABA) directly requested the OCC to suspend the approval process.
BPI CEO Greg Baer believes that trust banks do not need to meet the same regulatory and capital standards as federally insured universal banks, and that the trust charters approved by the OCC far exceed the statutory and historical purposes of trust bank charters.
The focus of the legal dispute: a letter of explanation
The legal core of this conflict centers on Interpretive Letter 1176, issued by the OCC in 2021. This letter redefined the scope of activities for trust banks, effectively lowering the barriers for cryptocurrency and fintech companies to obtain charters.
Notably, the author of this letter was Jonathan Gould, then Chief Counsel of the OCC, who now oversees the enforcement of this rule as Acting Comptroller of the Currency. On February 27, 2026, the OCC further submitted a rule amendment changing the language regarding fiduciary activities to “trust company operations and related activities,” with the revision set to take effect on April 1. Critics argue that this wording change will further blur the boundaries of trust bank activities.
Legal arguments by institutions such as BPI focus on the fact that the OCC substantially changed licensing rules through interpretive letters and wording revisions, bypassing the formal rulemaking procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), including public notice and comment. If litigation is initiated, this procedural flaw will be the plaintiffs' primary point of attack.
Gould argued that trust companies have long provided both fiduciary and non-fiduciary custody services, that stablecoin reserves constitute a narrow, segregated, non-credit-creating activity, and that the law requires the OCC Comptroller to approve all applicants meeting statutory criteria, regardless of the technology they employ.
Behind the battle for licenses, who will gain access to the U.S. financial system?
On the surface, this dispute concerns the approval criteria for a license, but at a deeper level, the core issue at stake is who has the right to enter the U.S. financial system and under what standards.
Traditional banking is concerned about regulatory arbitrage: crypto companies and fintech firms can operate across all 50 U.S. states with just a single trust charter, offering services such as payments, custody, and stablecoin issuance, without bearing the same capital requirements, consumer protection obligations, or deposit insurance costs as full-service banks.
The logic on the cryptocurrency industry side is equally clear: obtaining a unified regulatory status at the federal level is a crucial step toward mainstream adoption. If the OCC’s licensing pathway is closed, crypto companies will once again face the high compliance costs and fragmented regulatory landscape of applying for licenses state by state.
BPI has not yet formally filed a lawsuit, but according to informed sources, its legal team is already preparing for one. CSBS also retains the option to pursue litigation. If either or both parties take action in the coming months, this would become the most significant legal confrontation in U.S. banking regulation since CSBS sued the OCC in 2020 over its refusal to grant fintech charters.
The OCC’s response window, the rule amendments effective April 1, and the follow-up on controversial applications such as World Liberty Financial will be the most significant milestones to watch in the coming period.