Banks in the US Now Free to Play with Blockchain?

[Hamza2424]

OCC = Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, it’s a U.S. regulator under the Treasury. They’re the ones who oversee national banks and savings institutions. So if OCC says something about crypto or blockchain, it matters because it basically tells U.S. banks what they can or can’t do.

In short, if OCC gives the green light, banks can start touching crypto more openly. If they say no, banks will avoid it.
That’s why their recent softer tone on blockchain is a big deal.

can this be a good news for bitcoin's adoption?

You are right OCC is a key USA regulator and they supervise banks that means anything coming from them carries real weight and if they are considering Blockchain and talking about cryptocurrency then we are going to see a massive adoption from the banking sector too, although they have to comply with SEC and FinCen too but SEC is already very crypto friendly now, not so sure about FinCen but they will also become friendly.

This is a big news in the mass adoption of Bitcoin and the banks controls trillions of assets and if they opened their vaults for Bitcoin then bro it is already 10x from current price, but I don't think they will talk or consider Bitcoin but they will adopt Bitcoin's Blockchain technology or any blockchain technology.

[TNavarro007]

This may prove to be highly problematic. For a detailed discussion, go to Substack (search for ‘cbgarcia’).

[betswift]

You are right OCC is a key USA regulator and they supervise banks that means anything coming from them carries real weight and if they are considering Blockchain and talking about cryptocurrency then we are going to see a massive adoption from the banking sector too, although they have to comply with SEC and FinCen too but SEC is already very crypto friendly now, not so sure about FinCen but they will also become friendly.

This is a big news in the mass adoption of Bitcoin and the banks controls trillions of assets and if they opened their vaults for Bitcoin then bro it is already 10x from current price, but I don't think they will talk or consider Bitcoin but they will adopt Bitcoin's Blockchain technology or any blockchain technology.

I would rather say they would implement BTC and crypto in their services, but not being too interested in the blockchain itself - and integrations with it, but we will see.

[slaman29]

<>
'Hey, make it easier to make crypto business' is different from 'Here is a new set of rules of what you must have by this date or else'

But time will come when this will be reality. Banks are in business, so if they see an opportunity to earn, they’ll go with it. What they’re waiting for are just the policies so they can adopt and comply. Running a bank isn’t easy, penalties are usually stiff, but with the right guidelines it’s possible they could offer this.

Banks actually don't mind paying penalties if it makes them money. They will knowingly do such errors or even crimes if the net result is profit. Believe me, they will say, ok this crime can make us 500 million so we can afford 200 million fine.

They don't care about crypto or anything it can be shit they will take it if it makes them profit (minus fine).

'we wish you well as long as we get our share'

Agreed. I would need to write to my phrase that we wish businesses well as long as you are paying up

They will even advice you on how to do it so you win-win. Might not be in contract but if you are rich enough the banks will negotiate with you Crypto. NFT. anything!

[Hamza2424]

I would rather say they would implement BTC and crypto in their services, but not being too interested in the blockchain itself - and integrations with it, but we will see.

Hmm you can be right, as if they wanted to integrate blockchain into their internal affairs, they could have done it already because for that they didn't had to touch Bitcoin so they might not be breaking any law so this really indicates they’re more focused on practical crypto services (custody, trading, payments) rather than experimenting with blockchain technology itself.

Although with ETFs, some big investors can access crypto using banks directly to the crypto, like BTC etfs or eth etfs, this was a big step in the adoption of crypto by the banks, so maybe this is it.

This may prove to be highly problematic. For a detailed discussion, go to Substack (search for ‘cbgarcia’).

There is nothing related to the topic there, some talks about religious type cult only, you can explain here though!

[shinratensei_]

can this be a good news for bitcoin's adoption?

Sure, why not? It seems there's surge of traditional finance integration with defi nowadays and it could be part of it.
People already use custodial wallet anyway if they want to use custodial wallet there's no problem with having the better custodial wallet with insurance.

It could possibly increase influx of capital to crypto as well if user can convert to bitcoin easily or as it happens banks accept bitcoin deposit.

[nemesis_incarnate]

can this be a good news for bitcoin's adoption?

Sure, why not? It seems there's surge of traditional finance integration with defi nowadays and it could be part of it.
People already use custodial wallet anyway if they want to use custodial wallet there's no problem with having the better custodial wallet with insurance.

It could possibly increase influx of capital to crypto as well if user can convert to bitcoin easily or as it happens banks accept bitcoin deposit.

Good news for adoption, bad news for your custody, but overall, I do think that's a good development, even though it hinders some aspects that make crypto - crypto.

[Nwada001]

Good news for adoption, bad news for your custody, but overall, I do think that's a good development, even though it hinders some aspects that make crypto - crypto.

Good news for adoption, but how bad is the news for self-custody?Only those who will choose to use a custody service to save their coin will give away their freedom. Just like we have the choice to choose whether to save in an exchange or withdraw down to a self-custodian wallet, the banking sector is a business place; they won't force you to come deposit your coin with them, and neither will your self-custodian coins be automatically sent over there without your will.

[tread93]

OCC = Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, it’s a U.S. regulator under the Treasury. They’re the ones who oversee national banks and savings institutions. So if OCC says something about crypto or blockchain, it matters because it basically tells U.S. banks what they can or can’t do.

In short, if OCC gives the green light, banks can start touching crypto more openly. If they say no, banks will avoid it.
That’s why their recent softer tone on blockchain is a big deal.

can this be a good news for bitcoin's adoption?


Changes Afoot With the OCC's Approach to Crypto

Comptroller Gould's recent comments reflect notable change in the OCC's approach to blockchain technology and crypto

On September 10, 2025, Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould spoke at the CoinDesk Regulation and Policy Conference in Washington, D.C. His comments were particularly noteworthy as they reflect the significant policy differences between this and the prior Administration regarding cryptcurrency and blockchain technology. Similar themes were included in Comptroller Gould's September 10 remarks to the Financial Stability Oversight Council. We note those points below and comment on each of them.

First, the Comptroller noted that blockchain technology and cryptocurrency are now included within the financial intermediation services provided by banks. As such, they are now considered part of the business of banking, subject to having in place the infrastructure needed to support them.

Banks got their blockchain card and I cant wait to see more of those kinds of cards with the crypto rewards. I saw gemini do thst and its pretty sweet. I hope they do something worthwhile and dont bog it down

[Danica22]

Good news for adoption, bad news for your custody, but overall, I do think that's a good development, even though it hinders some aspects that make crypto - crypto.

Good news for adoption, but how bad is the news for self-custody?Only those who will choose to use a custody service to save their coin will give away their freedom. Just like we have the choice to choose whether to save in an exchange or withdraw down to a self-custodian wallet, the banking sector is a business place; they won't force you to come deposit your coin with them, and neither will your self-custodian coins be automatically sent over there without your will.

Currently, there may be no risk to self-custody but it could happen in the future. One possible scenario is when governments and banks fully adopt bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, and they want to have tighter control over their citizens. They will be able to issue some ban on non-custodial wallets or make the use of non-custodial wallets illegal. They will force us all to use wallets or centralized platforms that are legal and regulated by them.

[Natalim]

Banks actually don't mind paying penalties if it makes them money. They will knowingly do such errors or even crimes if the net result is profit. Believe me, they will say, ok this crime can make us 500 million so we can afford 200 million fine.

That’s not how it works in real scenarios. I’ve been in the banking industry, so I know how it goes. For lighter offenses, they’ll just slap you with a fine and you move on. But if it’s a bigger violation, that’s when a cease and desist comes in , and that’s the real death blow.

A fine is just a slap on the wrist, but once they hit you with a cease and desist, that’s game over.
No business, no income stream, nothing left.

[slaman29]

Banks actually don't mind paying penalties if it makes them money. They will knowingly do such errors or even crimes if the net result is profit. Believe me, they will say, ok this crime can make us 500 million so we can afford 200 million fine.

That’s not how it works in real scenarios. I’ve been in the banking industry, so I know how it goes. For lighter offenses, they’ll just slap you with a fine and you move on. But if it’s a bigger violation, that’s when a cease and desist comes in , and that’s the real death blow.

A fine is just a slap on the wrist, but once they hit you with a cease and desist, that’s game over.
No business, no income stream, nothing left.

I doubt you are in the backroom where they do budgets, otherwise you would not be on this forum as their salaries are in the millions. Sorry to  be so cynical about banks but I know they are evil

Name me a few big bank that has a cease and desist in the last 20 years. no tiny banks that only work in one country. We're talking about real millions here.

Last year Canadian bank TD bank was caught actually helping people to launder money. 3 billion $$ fine. Did they get cease and desist?

How about nonbanks. Binance caught actually even ADVISING people and HELPING customers to get fake citizenship to open accounts. Did they get even close to cease and desist? Nah, fine, 'jail', settlement. Business as usual.

[WhoYouCantKill]

Absolutely. When the OCC has a much friendly stance, the US banks may seem secured offering service that are crypto related, such as custody, payments or even settlement. Institutional backings such as these normally increases confidence and makes way  for broader adoption of Bitcoin and other digital assets.

[Patikno]

OCC = Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, it’s a U.S. regulator under the Treasury. They’re the ones who oversee national banks and savings institutions. So if OCC says something about crypto or blockchain, it matters because it basically tells U.S. banks what they can or can’t do.

In short, if OCC gives the green light, banks can start touching crypto more openly. If they say no, banks will avoid it.
That’s why their recent softer tone on blockchain is a big deal.

can this be a good news for bitcoin's adoption?

After Donald Trump was elected president of the United States, cryptocurrencies or blockchains began to appear to be getting freedom, or legal leniency, and this began to happen after the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) revoked the Staff Accounting Bulletin Number 121 (SAB121). Based on the information I received, the bank has actually received the green light, but they still need to comply with operational and procedural regulations. Cmiiw.

Source: ccn.com - US Regulators Finally Let Banks Hold Crypto After Years on the Sidelines

Regarding this, I think this could be good news for Bitcoin adoption. However, we must recognize that Trump's term or his leadership period is limited. So, I don't think we can get our hopes up (can't expect too much), and I think this is more likely good news for Bitcoin awareness. Cmiiw.

[coolcoinz]

Yes, U.S. banks are increasingly exploring blockchain for payments, settlements, and digital assets. Regulations are easing in some areas, letting them experiment more—but they still need to comply with existing financial and AML rules.

Blockchain is not bitcoin. I'd like to remind you that all scam shitcoins also say they're exploring blockchain for the good of the people. We're in bitcoin discussion, so the important part is what id will do for bitcoin.

IMO it's a step in the right direction because before that you had situations like JP Morgan claiming that bitcoin is a scam and trading it in secrecy. You had banks banning accounts of people who had a lot of transfers coming from known bitcoin exchanges, especially if they were situated abroad. This makes the bank lose their ability to explain to the customer why they are against cryptocurrencies and people who use them.

As for whether they will make their own crypto, or play with stablecoins, they'd be doing that anyway with or without guidance, just like said JP Morgan, or Custodia Bank.

[Natalim]

I doubt you are in the backroom where they do budgets, otherwise you would not be on this forum as their salaries are in the millions. Sorry to  be so cynical about banks but I know they are evil

Seriously, do you really think bank employees make millions? even most bank officers don’t earn that much. the real money is with the owners and top executives, not the regular staff. the people working inside the bank are just employees like in any other industry, they’re not the ones pocketing the big profits.

Name me a few big bank that has a cease and desist in the last 20 years. no tiny banks that only work in one country. We're talking about real millions here.

Last year Canadian bank TD bank was caught actually helping people to launder money. 3 billion $$ fine. Did they get cease and desist?

How about nonbanks. Binance caught actually even ADVISING people and HELPING customers to get fake citizenship to open accounts. Did they get even close to cease and desist? Nah, fine, 'jail', settlement. Business as usual.

That depends on the regulations of the country… I can only speak for where I live, and here we’ve already seen plenty of banks shut down for major violations. stricter regulation doesn’t always mean banks are safe, it just means when they get caught, they’re taken out.

 ... https://www.pdic.gov.ph/rl_ntcclosedbanks-100228p58

[slaman29]

I doubt you are in the backroom where they do budgets, otherwise you would not be on this forum as their salaries are in the millions. Sorry to  be so cynical about banks but I know they are evil

Seriously, do you really think bank employees make millions? even most bank officers don’t earn that much. the real money is with the owners and top executives, not the regular staff. the people working inside the bank are just employees like in any other industry, they’re not the ones pocketing the big profits.
[/quote]

Dude. Refer to what you're quoting. I said I doubt you are in the bank responsible for drawing up the budgets for fines. So, you're not earning millions. So, you're just a regular employee. So, you can't tell me banks don't do what we were initially referring to (adding a budget for compliance offences).

Who do you think makes the decisions for these budgets? The guys earning millions. Not rando employees. Not regular officers. Why are you bringing them into the picture?

I'm saying I doubt you're the guy making the millions, therefore you're not the guy making the decisions on the budgets. Therefore

Name me a few big bank that has a cease and desist in the last 20 years. no tiny banks that only work in one country. We're talking about real millions here.

Last year Canadian bank TD bank was caught actually helping people to launder money. 3 billion $$ fine. Did they get cease and desist?

How about nonbanks. Binance caught actually even ADVISING people and HELPING customers to get fake citizenship to open accounts. Did they get even close to cease and desist? Nah, fine, 'jail', settlement. Business as usual.

That depends on the regulations of the country… I can only speak for where I live, and here we’ve already seen plenty of banks shut down for major violations. stricter regulation doesn’t always mean banks are safe, it just means when they get caught, they’re taken out.

 ... https://www.pdic.gov.ph/rl_ntcclosedbanks-100228p58

Again, this means your earlier comments were out of context. You need to refer back again to topic title and the multimillion dollar fines I was talking about.

I used your link and then looked at the value of those banks. According to your same source PDIC in 2019 closed many banks yes. but guess what, they paid back all depositors ~1 billion PHP. Which I converted to <$18 million USD. ALL those banks had combined deposits of just less than $18M....

Does this tell you we were dealing with big banks or small banks? None of them would have been capable of the multimillion dollar value fines I was first talking about.

[Orpichukwu]

Absolutely. When the OCC has a much friendly stance, the US banks may seem secured offering service that are crypto related, such as custody, payments or even settlement. Institutional backings such as these normally increases confidence and makes way  for broader adoption of Bitcoin and other digital assets.

Adoption and widespread use of business starts with friendly regulation on that particular subject. Now that the OCC is creating a soft landing for all, definitely the banking sector will start to offer service to crypto users, as they have been missing out on the possible profit they could have been making, which restriction and regulatory concern have prevented them from.