On February 12, it was reported that in 2026, the American Bankers Association (ABA) officially sent a letter to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), demanding an immediate halt to the review of national bank charters for multiple cryptocurrency companies, including Ripple, Circle, and other related applicants. This move is seen as a strong countermeasure by the traditional American banking system against the expansion of the digital asset sector.
In the letter, the ABA stated that until Congress completes a regulatory framework for crypto finance, the OCC should not continue processing these applications at the traditional banking approval pace. The association emphasized that regulators must thoroughly assess applicants’ compliance responsibilities, capital structures, and potential systemic risks before issuing any charters.
One of the contentious issues is the GENIUS Act. The ABA criticized the OCC for tying charter approvals to this bill, which still requires several federal agencies to complete supporting regulations, and full implementation could take years. The ABA is concerned that issuing licenses prematurely, before the regulatory system is fully developed, could increase bankruptcy and liquidity risks.
Currently, Ripple’s application is the most closely watched. The company previously received conditional approval from the OCC, which was seen as a step away from full licensing. This development has triggered strong opposition from the ABA. Additionally, World Liberty Financial has also applied to become a federally chartered national trust bank, sparking controversy in political circles.
Besides these companies, Circle, BitGo, Paxos, and Laser Digital, a subsidiary of Nomura Securities, have also been mentioned as relevant cases. The ABA also warned that some crypto institutions might bypass restrictions on interest income outlined in the GENIUS Act through affiliated platforms, creating regulatory arbitrage.
This incident indicates that the battle between the US crypto finance sector and the traditional banking system is escalating. As legislative and regulatory processes continue to advance, whether the OCC will adjust its review pace will directly impact the institutionalization of the US digital asset industry.
Disclaimer: The information on this page may come from third parties and does not represent the views or opinions of Gate. The content displayed on this page is for reference only and does not constitute any financial, investment, or legal advice. Gate does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information and shall not be liable for any losses arising from the use of this information. Virtual asset investments carry high risks and are subject to significant price volatility. You may lose all of your invested principal. Please fully understand the relevant risks and make prudent decisions based on your own financial situation and risk tolerance. For details, please refer to
Disclaimer.
Related Articles
Elliptic reveals 5 exchanges assisting Russia in evading sanctions: ABCeX alone trades $11 billion
Blockchain analytics company Elliptic has identified five cryptocurrency exchanges assisting Russia in evading sanctions, with ABCeX's total trading volume exceeding $11 billion. The report analyzes the operational models of these exchanges, including obfuscating transaction sources and dealings with sanctioned platforms. The European Union plans to impose a comprehensive ban on cryptocurrency transactions with Russia, but enforcement faces challenges. After each round of sanctions, new trading platforms quickly emerge, undermining the effectiveness of the sanctions.
動區BlockTempo5m ago
Elliptic: Five crypto trading platforms assist Russia in evading sanctions, filling the gap left by Garantex's closure
Elliptic reports that after sanctions, the Russian crypto trading platform Garantex was seized, and at least five alternative platforms still provide funding channels for sanctioned entities, although most have not yet been sanctioned. Platforms like Bitpapa and ABCeX frequently change wallets to evade monitoring, and research shows that related sanctions evasion activities continue across multiple platforms.
GateNewsBot3h ago
Caixin: RWA based on Hong Kong assets are not under the jurisdiction of Chinese regulatory authorities
The No. 42 document jointly issued by the People's Bank of China and seven other departments clearly defines the regulatory framework for virtual currencies and related risks. It stipulates strict control over domestic assets going abroad for RWA issuance, with Hong Kong identified as a potential issuance location, but it is not within the scope of mainland regulation. The overall tone emphasizes strict regulation and does not include any encouragement for development.
GateNewsBot5h ago
X Product Manager: Infode is suspected to be connected with Kalshi, and its ranking aims to increase click-through rates by using female imagery.
X Product Lead Nikita Bier questions the Infodex list of the most valuable startups in 2025, specifically pointing out valuation issues with the fintech company Kalshi, and claims that the list information is false, demanding disclosure of whether it is paid promotion content.
GateNewsBot5h ago
X Platform to Launch Disclosure Requirements for Paid Promotions Including Kalshi and Polymarket Ads
Gate News bot message, X platform announces the introduction of disclosure features for paid promotions, including advertisements for Kalshi and Polymarket. According to Nikitabier, accounts that fail to provide proper disclosure will face suspension. The new policy requires transparency for promoti
GateNewsBot7h ago
Caixin: Document No. 42 sets the tone for "strict regulation of overseas RWA," China International Capital Corporation Hong Kong has already explored cooperation with public chains and exchanges
According to reports, the Hong Kong China International Capital (CICC) team is in talks with public chains and exchanges about cooperation, focusing on market dynamics following the release of Document No. 42. Regulatory officials pointed out that RWA based on Hong Kong assets are not regulated by this document, while outbound RWA of domestic assets require strict regulation, emphasizing that rapid development is not encouraged.
GateNewsBot17h ago
