US Banks' Crypto Secret: How They're Profiting From Your Trades

US Banks' Crypto Secret: How They're Profiting From Your Trades and What It Means for the Future of Digital Assets

The US banking system and the world of cryptocurrency have long been seen as separate entities. However, a recent move by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) is blurring those lines, allowing national banks to play a significant role in crypto trading and custody. This isn't about banks suddenly embracing Bitcoin as currency; it's about a strategic positioning to profit from the growing digital asset market while adhering to existing regulatory frameworks. This article dives deep into the OCC’s recent actions, the implications for both banks and crypto firms, and what this means for the future of digital asset regulation in the United States.

The OCC's Green Light: Interpretive Letter 1188 and Beyond

On December 9th, the OCC issued News Release 2025-121, accompanied by Interpretive Letter 1188, effectively giving US banks the go-ahead to participate as intermediaries in crypto trades. This allows banks to operate on a “riskless principal” basis – acting as the buyer to one customer and the seller to another, without holding significant token inventories themselves. This is a crucial distinction, minimizing the bank’s direct exposure to the volatile crypto market.

Comptroller Jonathan Gould further clarified the OCC’s stance, stating there’s no reason to treat digital assets differently than traditional assets when it comes to custody and safekeeping. This directly addresses concerns raised by the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), which argued against granting national trust charters to crypto firms, fearing they would bypass traditional banking regulations like deposit insurance.

Understanding the Players: The OCC and its Role

For those unfamiliar with the US financial regulatory landscape, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) is a vital component. It’s an independent bureau within the US Treasury responsible for chartering, regulating, and supervising national banks and federal savings associations. Unlike agencies funded through congressional budgets, the OCC is self-funded through assessments and fees, providing a degree of independence.

The Comptroller of the Currency, currently Jonathan Gould, leads the OCC and holds significant influence. He not only oversees the granting of national bank charters but also participates in broader financial stability discussions through roles on the FDIC board and the Financial Stability Oversight Council. The power to grant a bank charter is central to the OCC’s authority.

What is a National Bank Charter?

A national bank charter is essentially a license to operate as a bank under federal law. The OCC manages these licenses at the federal level, while state regulators handle licensing at the state level. Obtaining a charter requires demonstrating sufficient capital, a credible management team, a robust business plan, and comprehensive risk controls – including credit, operational, and cybersecurity risks. These standards apply equally to traditional and digital-only banks.

The Appeal of National Trust Charters for Crypto Firms

Within the banking world, national trust banks occupy a unique niche. They are chartered by the OCC to focus on trust-related activities like acting as trustees, executors, investment managers, or custodians of assets. Crucially, they typically don’t take traditional retail deposits and often aren’t covered by FDIC insurance.

This structure makes national trust charters attractive to crypto firms seeking to hold customer tokens, manage stablecoin reserves, or facilitate settlement flows without becoming full-fledged commercial banks. A trust charter offers:

• A federal supervisor (the OCC).
• Nationwide reach.
• A potential path to avoid the full weight of holding-company supervision.

BPI's Concerns and the Regulatory Tug-of-War

Traditional banks, represented by the Bank Policy Institute (BPI), are wary of this trend. They argue that trust charters were intended for institutions primarily engaged in fiduciary activities, not broader payment and reserve businesses. BPI fears that new entrants could handle significant financial activity with a lighter regulatory touch, creating an uneven playing field.

However, Comptroller Gould maintains that technology shouldn’t be the dividing line. He points to the long history of electronic custody and book-entry securities, arguing that holding cryptographic claims on a blockchain shouldn’t be treated as fundamentally different. This perspective is reinforced by Interpretive Letter 1188, which draws parallels between riskless principal crypto trades and existing brokerage activities.

What This Means for Crypto Custody and Trading

The OCC’s guidance provides explicit comfort to US banks, allowing them to match crypto trades for clients on a riskless principal basis. This opens the door for banks to build customer-facing crypto brokerage and routing services with minimal balance sheet risk. It also builds upon previous OCC letters allowing banks to hold stablecoin reserves and provide basic crypto custody services.

For crypto companies, the possibility of securing a national trust charter remains open. If the OCC approves digital asset firms that meet the core standards of capital, management, risk control, and community needs, a significant portion of US crypto custody and settlement could migrate to OCC-supervised national trust banks.

Benefits for Different Crypto Players

• Exchanges: A route to offer institutional clients a vertically integrated stack: trading, fiat settlement, and on-chain custody, all under federal supervision.
• Stablecoin Issuers: The ability to hold reserves in an OCC-regulated balance sheet and utilize Fed-connected correspondent networks.
• Prime Brokers & Asset Managers: Increased confidence in custody solutions, aligning with US securities regulations requiring “qualified custodians” for digital assets.

The Path Forward: Challenges and Global Implications

While the OCC’s stance is encouraging for the crypto industry, obtaining a trust charter won’t be easy. The OCC retains broad discretion to evaluate applicants based on management quality, financial strength, and community benefits. Detailed objections from groups like BPI are already being filed, scrutinizing crypto platforms’ consumer protection records and ownership structures.

Globally, the OCC’s decisions are likely to have a ripple effect. Large banks operating internationally often look to US regulations when developing new business lines, and foreign regulators closely monitor the OCC’s actions. If US national banks begin offering riskless principal routing for Bitcoin and Ethereum under clear OCC guidance, it will likely influence expectations in other financial centers like London, Frankfurt, and Singapore.

A Gradual Clarification, Not a Revolution

The OCC’s move isn’t a complete opening of the floodgates for crypto within the US banking system. Instead, it’s a gradual clarification of how existing regulations apply to digital assets. By anchoring crypto activities to established regulatory hooks – brokerage, custody, and fiduciary services – the OCC is providing a framework for responsible innovation.

This clarity is crucial for crypto firms seeking institutional investment and for banks considering entering the digital asset space. The coming months and years will determine whether OCC Letter 1188 and Comptroller Gould’s speech mark the beginning of a new era of bank-run crypto plumbing or simply another chapter in the ongoing evolution of financial regulation.

Mentioned in this article:

Bitcoin Ethereum