ABA Banking Journal
No Result
View All Result
  • Topics
    • Ag Banking
    • Commercial Lending
    • Community Banking
    • Compliance and Risk
    • Cybersecurity
    • Economy
    • Human Resources
    • Insurance
    • Legal
    • Mortgage
    • Mutual Funds
    • Payments
    • Policy
    • Retail and Marketing
    • Tax and Accounting
    • Technology
    • Wealth Management
  • Newsbytes
  • Podcasts
  • Magazine
    • Subscribe
    • Advertise
    • Magazine Archive
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Podcast Archive
    • Sponsored Content Archive
SUBSCRIBE
ABA Banking Journal
  • Topics
    • Ag Banking
    • Commercial Lending
    • Community Banking
    • Compliance and Risk
    • Cybersecurity
    • Economy
    • Human Resources
    • Insurance
    • Legal
    • Mortgage
    • Mutual Funds
    • Payments
    • Policy
    • Retail and Marketing
    • Tax and Accounting
    • Technology
    • Wealth Management
  • Newsbytes
  • Podcasts
  • Magazine
    • Subscribe
    • Advertise
    • Magazine Archive
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Podcast Archive
    • Sponsored Content Archive
No Result
View All Result
No Result
View All Result
ADVERTISEMENT
Home Payments

Regulatory arbitrage in the payments system is risky business

April 22, 2022
Reading Time: 3 mins read
The Federal Reserve Board headquarters in Washington, D.C.

The Federal Reserve Board headquarters in Washington, D.C.

By Steve Kenneally
ABA Viewpoint

Innovation happens when creators find efficiencies—shortcuts or backdoors that sidestep obstacles that don’t belong anymore. The Ford Model T assembly line found shortcuts in time that made it possible to mass-produce affordable cars. The credit card allowed merchants to sidestep the process of validating the legitimacy of shoppers’ checks and allowed consumers to skip the process of getting and holding cash.

But not all backdoors are signs of innovation. Some of them are created by regulatory arbitrage—an effort to game the system and capitalize on points of weakness in the rules and laws that are meant to protect us all. And while some efforts at regulatory arbitrage illuminate places where we can modernize regulation, many others point to a place where a well-working regulatory structure needs to be reinforced.

Consider our payment system: it’s worked well with the Federal Reserve Banks and its regulated financial institution participants because all parties are held to the same high standards. However, over the past several years some under-regulated entities have sought access to the Fed’s payment system, and that presents a risk we just can’t accept.

In Wyoming, a new charter type for “special purpose depository institutions,” or SPDIs, was created to attract cryptocurrency businesses to establish state-chartered institutions that would carry out some bank functions—but with no federal supervision or insurance. Instead of FDIC insurance the banks must carry reserves to offset all deposits. Because there is no FDIC insurance, these entities are not subject to the Bank Holding Company Act.

Currently, there are two SPDI applications for access to the payment system pending with the Fed. This regulatory arbitrage play should be rejected. They are seeking access to the payment system without the oversight that the rest of the participants in that same payment system receive. We urge the Federal Reserve to recognize this end-run to avoid financial oversight, while still seeking all the benefits access to the payment system provides.

Consider a SPDI with no federal oversight or insurance getting access to the payment system. Without a federal agency or the FDIC looking over their shoulder, bank customers’ deposits and privacy are at risk. The same state agency that fast-tracked these charters is responsible for protecting the consumer. One of the SPDIs has a parent company that is a large cryptocurrency exchange, and without the BHCA applying there is no oversight of that relationship or the risks it poses.

There is trouble brewing with some trust charters approved by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency as well. At the end of the prior administration, the OCC issued an interpretative letter that expanded the eligibility criteria for federal trust charters from the OCC, even if they do not plan to provide traditional fiduciary services.

The result is that several state-chartered trust companies that provide merely custodial services for digital assets were granted conditional approval for a national OCC charter and thus on the path to apply for Federal Reserve payment system access. The OCC fundamentally changed the eligibility for trust charter applicants with no public notice or comment period. (Just this week, the OCC entered into a consent order with one of those companies for failing to adopt and implement an anti-money laundering compliance program.) This is a familiar arbitrage play. Chartered institutions focusing on digital assets with no FDIC or BHCA oversight are seeking access to the payment system. This time it was done with an assist by the OCC, although the OCC may no longer be as receptive to these approvals.

The Federal Reserve payment system has long worked well because all of the players were subject to consistent oversight and supervision. If these novel charters are allowed access in their current form, we cannot be sure the system will retain that strength and resilience. Innovation that puts the payment system at greater risk isn’t “disruption.” It’s an unforced error that the Fed can and should easily avoid.

Steve Kenneally is SVP for payments system policy issues at ABA.

ABA Viewpoint is the source for analysis, commentary and perspective from the American Bankers Association on the policy issues shaping banking today and into the future. Click here to view all posts in this series.

ADVERTISEMENT
Tags: ABA ViewpointCryptocurrencyFintechNonbanksPayments system
ShareTweetPin

Related Posts

New infographics provide advice for identifying money mules, check fraud

Banking agencies seek public comment on strategies to combat payments fraud

Compliance and Risk
June 16, 2025

The FDIC, Federal Reserve and OCC issued a request for comment on potential actions to help consumers, businesses and financial institutions mitigate risks related to payments fraud, particularly check fraud.

ABA, associations object to CFPB ‘junk fee’ label for mortgage-related fees

ABA urges CFPB to preserve streamlined mortgage relief option

Mortgage
June 16, 2025

The CFPB should retain a key provision of its pandemic-era servicing rules that allows servicers to offer streamlined loan modifications to borrowers based on incomplete applications for loss mitigation, ABA said.

Illinois lawmakers vote to delay implementation date for state interchange fee law

Illinois pushes back implementation date for state interchange fee law

Newsbytes
June 16, 2025

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker signed into law a bill that extends by a year the effective date of a first-of-its-kind state law restricting interchange fees.

CFPB claims ‘complex’ pricing drives up cost of financial products

ABA, associations reiterate concerns about CFPB nonbank registry

Compliance and Risk
June 16, 2025

ABA joined two associations in reiterating their concerns about the CFPB’s nonbank registry, which the current bureau leadership has proposed to eliminate.

CFPB launches ‘tip line’ to report on bureau employees

ABA, associations urge CFPB to rescind changes to adjudication process

Legal
June 13, 2025

ABA joined three associations in voicing support for a CFPB proposal to rescind a set of changes to the bureau’s rules that, among other things, gave its director authority to resolve adjudication hearings overseen by the agency.

Senate bill would mandate discount window testing, modernization

Proposal to end Fed interest payments to banks faces pushback

Newsbytes
June 13, 2025

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-S.C.) said a proposal to prevent the Federal Reserve from paying interest to banks “is not a decision to be rushed” and must follow proper parliamentary procedure, Bloomberg Law reported.

NEWSBYTES

Banking agencies seek public comment on strategies to combat payments fraud

June 16, 2025

ABA urges CFPB to preserve streamlined mortgage relief option

June 16, 2025

Illinois pushes back implementation date for state interchange fee law

June 16, 2025

SPONSORED CONTENT

AI Compliance and Regulation: What Financial Institutions Need to Know

Unlocking Deposit Growth: How Financial Institutions Can Activate Data for Precision Cross-Sell

June 1, 2025
Choosing the Right Account Opening Platform: 10 Key Considerations for Long-Term Success

Choosing the Right Account Opening Platform: 10 Key Considerations for Long-Term Success

April 25, 2025
Outsourcing: Getting to Go/No-Go

Outsourcing: Getting to Go/No-Go

April 5, 2025
Six Payments Trends Driving the Future of Transactions

Six Payments Trends Driving the Future of Transactions

March 15, 2025

PODCASTS

Podcast: Old National’s Jim Ryan on the things that really matter

June 12, 2025

Podcast: What bankers need to know about ‘First Amendment audits’

June 5, 2025

Podcast: Accelerating banking for quick-service restaurants

May 8, 2025
ADVERTISEMENT

American Bankers Association
1333 New Hampshire Ave NW
Washington, DC 20036
1-800-BANKERS (800-226-5377)
www.aba.com
About ABA
Privacy Policy
Contact ABA

ABA Banking Journal
About ABA Banking Journal
Media Kit
Advertising
Subscribe

© 2025 American Bankers Association. All rights reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • Topics
    • Ag Banking
    • Commercial Lending
    • Community Banking
    • Compliance and Risk
    • Cybersecurity
    • Economy
    • Human Resources
    • Insurance
    • Legal
    • Mortgage
    • Mutual Funds
    • Payments
    • Policy
    • Retail and Marketing
    • Tax and Accounting
    • Technology
    • Wealth Management
  • Newsbytes
  • Podcasts
  • Magazine
    • Subscribe
    • Advertise
    • Magazine Archive
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Podcast Archive
    • Sponsored Content Archive

© 2025 American Bankers Association. All rights reserved.