Comptroller of the Currency Tom Curry Discusses Fintech Charters

Financial Industry Alert
March.07.2017

In his remarks at the LendIt Conference in New York, Comptroller of the Currency Tom Curry discussed the special purpose national bank charters to be granted by the OCC to fintech companies and addressed the various questions, criticism and challenges that have been made since the OCC's fintech charter announcement (click here to read Orrick's previous client alert regarding this announcement).

OCC Authority

In response to comments challenging the OCC authority and the wisdom of issuing such charters, Curry said, in no uncertain terms, that the OCC will be issuing special fintech charters. Curry said that the OCC has authority under the National Bank Act to grant special purpose national bank charters to fintech companies "engaged in the business of banking," including to firms that do not take deposits. Curry emphasized that limited purpose charters have been issued for decades. He also said that the OCC has the knowledge of the relevant models, the experience and the appropriate resources that will allow it to successfully oversee the fintech chartered entities.

The question whether firms with fintech charters will be subject to regulation under the Bank Holding Company Act is still under discussion by the OCC and the Federal Reserve.

Fintech Charter Requirements

Curry said that fintech chartered firms will not be required to obtain special purpose national bank charters and that extremely high standards would be imposed on firms that are granted charters. Such a charter is not for everyone, and Curry expects that there will be fintechs that prefer to operate under a state licensing model.

There is a recognition at the OCC that fintech chartered firms are different from brick-and-mortar banks, and those differences will be taken into account in setting standards. Fintech chartered firms will be subject to regular on-site supervision by experienced examiners focused on safety and soundness and compliance with law, and with appropriately calculated capital and liquidity protections (which have not yet been specified, but which Curry suggested will be tailored to the model of a low-asset fintech platform).

A supplement to the OCC's licensing manual will be published and will describe the capital, liquidity and other standards and the business plan to be required of firms with fintech charters. Financial inclusion is a responsibility of all federally chartered institutions and will be a responsibility of fintech chartered firms as well. Similarly, the Bank Secrecy Act requirements related to money laundering will also apply to such firms.

Curry made clear that a sound business plan, with rigorous compliance measures and controls, will be key to obtaining a fintech charter. The plan must describe, among other things, the risks of the business, including diversification of risk and funding sources, particularly if volatile, and how to provide for a "soft landing" for customers in the event of a failure. The plan will need to show that the fintech will not be engaging in predatory lending and other abusive practices. Fair access and fair treatment to customers will be required. Fintech chartered firms will also be required to support the needs of the communities they serve through financial inclusion.

The OCC's new Office of Innovation will explain to fintech chartered firms what is required to be in place. Curry stated that the evaluation of the plans will be an individualized process. The OCC has also been advising prospective charter applicants on applicable Bank Secrecy Act and AML requirements.

State Consumer Protection Laws/ Usury Ceilings

Like any OCC chartered institution, state law consumer protection laws will continue to apply to fintech chartered firms. The area where the sharpest difference may remain with several states is on interest rate preemption. Curry noted that since the time of President Lincoln, federal law has provided for national banks to be able to charge the interest rate of the state in which the bank is organized without regard to the interest rate limits that may be imposed by the states where the borrowers reside. The ability of fintech chartered firms to do the same is "consistent with history and law." However, Curry noted that the question of whether interest rates can legally be exported will ultimately be resolved by the courts (or possibly legislation). The OCC's view is that it is important to recognize that if a loan was valid when the loan was made, then the loan cannot thereafter become invalid and that banks must be able to make loans and to sell those loans to third parties without changing the terms of the loans. In response to a question about whether the OCC would issue a formal interpretive opinion on the Madden vs. Midland Funding case, Curry noted that though the OCC stated to the Supreme Court that Madden was wrongly decided by the Second Circuit, the OCC cannot overrule the courts.

Authors

Robert Loeb Partner, Supreme Court & Appellate, Bankruptcy Litigation

Washington, D.C.

See my bio

D:+1 202 339 8475
E: [email protected]

Practice:

Finance Sector
Supreme Court & Appellate
Bankruptcy Litigation
Complex Litigation & Dispute Resolution
Energy
Litigation & IP
White Collar, Investigations, Securities Litigation & Compliance

vCard

See full bio

Robert Loeb Partner

Washington, D.C.

The breadth and depth of Bob's appellate experience, and his consistent track record of success in high-stakes matters, are why clients, including top tech and energy companies, trust him with their most important cases.

The National Law Journal’s Litigator of the Week column recently recognized Bob’s appellate major wins in energy and product liability cases for Broadreach Power and Johnson & Johnson. Bob’s recent victories also include Fifth Circuit wins for energy clients Cheniere and Eni. In the Cheniere-Midship case, Bob obtained an emergency stay from the court of appeals of the regulating agency proceedings and, then after oral argument, achieved a full victory. And for Eni, Bob convinced the Fifth Circuit to vacate a $300M judgment against Eni in a dispute with another energy company. These types of big wins in the most challenging cases show why both Chambers and Legal 500 rank Bob among the Country’s top appellate advocates.

Bob has argued before the Supreme Court multiple times (including a 9-0 victory regarding application of the Fourth Amendment to rental cars), and has filed hundreds of briefs in the Supreme Court. He has also handled cases in highest state courts in California, New York, Maine, Kentucky and New Jersey.

Before joining Orrick, Bob served as one of the leaders of an elite appellate group at the Department of Justice. There, in addition to major national security, commercial, and administrative law, Bob supervised bankruptcy appeals. At Orrick, Bob has continued to handle big ticket bankruptcy matters, such as a billion-dollar dispute over whether DHL’s claim was discharged by United’s bankruptcy, appeals from the City of Stockton bankruptcy confirmation, and a Ninth Circuit matter involving the interplay of the Takings Clause and bankruptcy law.

Bob’s recent work includes matters for Johnson & Johnson, Avon, Microsoft, Eni, Cheniere Energy, Freeport LNG, Broadreach Power, LS Power, Exxon, Medidata, Renco, MSC Cruise Line, Golden 1 Credit Union, Credit Suisse, TravelCenters of America, Gannett, and the City of Stockton.