Banking

Subscribe to Banking via RSS

On September 2, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), and National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) issued a joint statement clarifying the confidentiality requirements related to Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs), particularly when banks communicate with customers regarding potentially fraudulent transactions, other suspicious activity, or account closures. The statement applies to all banks, including community banks.

On August 26, New York State Senator Zellnor Myrie introduced Senate Bill S10688, legislation that would enact an express “opt out” from key provisions of the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 (DIDMCA), purporting to impose New York’s interest rate limitations on a broad range of consumer credit transactions. The bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Rules the same day. This proposed legislation marks the latest development in a continuing trend of state efforts to regulate state-chartered banks and fintech partnerships and impose restrictions on bank-model lending.

On July 31, the OCC and FDIC jointly issued a proposed rule to significantly amend their existing Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulations that have been in place since 1995.  While the proposal would retain key elements of the regulatory framework, it seeks to better align the regulations with CRA’s statutory mandate of encouraging banks to meet the credit needs of their communities by making “targeted” substantive, technical, and process-oriented changes and narrowing the scope of the rules.  Toward that end, the proposal focuses on the lending test, ensures that community development grants reach the communities they are intended to benefit, and narrows the range of retail banking services the agencies consider for CRA credit by excluding deposit services.  The proposed rule also seeks to provide greater clarity on how a bank receives CRA consideration and to reduce burden on banks (particularly community banks). Notably, the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) did not join the proposal.

On June 15, three major financial services trade associations filed suit in federal court to block Oregon’s HB 4116 from applying its 36% interest rate cap to consumer finance loans made by out-of-state, state-chartered banks. The lawsuit follows a similar challenge to Colorado’s opt-out, which remains pending before the Tenth Circuit on rehearing en banc.

Federal regulators recently took two coordinated steps that significantly shift expectations for how lenders and banks treat non‑work authorized individuals and their employers. On June 5, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a formal statement on how immigration status should factor into ability‑to‑repay determinations under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Regulation Z. On the same day, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), jointly with the federal banking agencies and in coordination with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), released a detailed advisory on fraud, payroll schemes, and money laundering risks associated with the unlawful employment of non-work authorized persons, including specific guidance regarding the use of Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) and Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs).

On June 4, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) filed an amicus brief in the Tenth Circuit’s en banc rehearing of National Association of Industrial Bankers v. Weiser, supporting industry plaintiffs and arguing that the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 (DIDMCA) § 525’s phrase “loans made in such State” refers to the state where the bank is located and performs key lending functions, not where the borrower resides. The filing confirms the FDIC’s historical position on the DIDMCA opt out and directly bears on the limited applicability of Colorado’s opt out and UCCC rate caps.

On June 2, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and Federal Reserve Board (FRB) jointly announced another step in their effort to eliminate “reputation risk” from the federal banking supervisory framework, an effort prompted by Executive Order 14331 (Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans). The agencies updated a broad set of interagency documents to remove references to “reputation risk” and, in some cases, “reputation,” reinforcing their earlier decision to stop using reputation risk as a basis for examination findings or exerting supervisory pressure on financial institutions to avoid or exit certain banking relationships.

This post was cited on July 13, 2026 in Briefs Finance, CNBC, and Mortgage Professional.

On May 19, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14406, “Restoring Integrity to America’s Financial System,” which establishes a new policy to safeguard financial institutions against structural credit risks and deter fraud and abuse. The order links illicit finance, immigration enforcement, and consumer credit risk, and directs federal financial regulators to tighten risk-based controls around non-work authorized populations and their employers. It reflects a policy view that even basic financial services, when offered without robust know-your-customer and due diligence, can facilitate terrorist financing, narcotics and human trafficking, and large-scale money laundering. At the same time, it expresses concern that lending to borrowers who lack work authorization or face a high risk of deportation may undermine safety and soundness because of heightened “ability-to-repay” concerns.

On May 27, the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA), Rise Economy (formerly known as the California Reinvestment Coalition), and two fair lending compliance companies (BLDS, LLC, and SolasAI) filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) Regulation B (Subpart A) final rule, which implements the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), and was issued on April 22, 2026. The case, National Fair Housing Alliance et al. v. CFPB et al., is notable not only for challenging the CFPB’s significant rewrite of longstanding Reg B, but also because the NFHA and Rise Economy are the first consumer advocacy organizations to sue the CFPB over the final rule.

Yesterday, President Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Integrating Financial Technology Innovation into Regulatory Frameworks.” The Order directs federal financial regulators to review and streamline regulations, guidance, supervisory practices, and application processes that may impede financial technology (fintech) innovation and competition, and it asks the Federal Reserve to evaluate potential direct access to Reserve Bank accounts and services for uninsured depository institutions and certain non‑bank financial firms, including digital asset companies. The Order is the latest in a series of administration actions aimed at positioning the U.S. as a global leader in digital assets and financial technology.