Priya Jaiswal is a distinguished expert in the intersections of banking, business, and financial regulation, currently navigating one of the most transformative eras in American fiscal history. With an extensive background in market analysis and portfolio management, she has become a leading voice on how emerging technologies are reshaping the traditional structures of federal oversight. As fintech giants and stablecoin infrastructure providers increasingly seek the legitimacy of national trust charters, Jaiswal provides essential clarity on the regulatory friction between Silicon Valley’s innovators and the established community banking sector.
The following discussion explores the strategic move by firms like Modern Treasury and Rain to secure Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) trust charters, the distinct operational paths of these companies regarding stablecoin issuance, and the legal challenges currently being mounted by traditional financial trade groups.
How do you interpret the strategic shift of fintech firms like Modern Treasury and Rain toward national trust charters rather than seeking traditional depository banking licenses?
This shift represents a sophisticated evolution in how fintech firms view federal legitimacy without the heavy operational burden of a traditional bank. By pursuing a national trust charter, these companies can offer asset custody and related services while explicitly opting out of taking deposits or making loans. Since the start of the current administration’s second term, the OCC has already approved or conditionally approved 21 national trust bank charters, creating a clear regulatory pipeline for firms that want to act as fiduciaries. For companies like Modern Treasury, this is about providing a “unified custody solution” that bridges the gap between fiat and digital assets for their clients. It allows them to answer to a federal regulator rather than navigating a fragmented landscape of state-level requirements, which is increasingly vital as stablecoins become foundational to global money movement.
Given that Rain intends to issue stablecoins while Modern Treasury does not, how do these different approaches reflect the current demands of the digital asset infrastructure market?
The divergent paths of these two firms show that there isn’t a one-size-fits-all model for modern financial infrastructure. Rain is positioning itself at the very center of the ecosystem by planning to issue stablecoins under the Genius Act and administering reserves for other permitted issuers. Their leadership, particularly proposed CEO Brandon Soto, recognizes that clients want the assets backing their programs held by a fiduciary that answers to a federal regulator to ensure maximum security. Modern Treasury, conversely, is focusing on the settlement and payment capabilities, integrating digital assets into their existing infrastructure without taking on the role of an issuer themselves. This variety in business models illustrates that the industry is maturing into specialized roles, where one firm provides the plumbing and another provides the liquid assets, yet both require the same high level of federal oversight.
What is your assessment of the legal tension created by the Independent Community Bankers of America’s lawsuit against the OCC regarding these specific charters?
The friction is quite significant and reached a boiling point with the lawsuit filed just this past Friday, which claims the OCC’s current stance puts community banks at a “severe competitive disadvantage.” The trade group argues that these trust charters essentially create a backdoor for crypto and fintech firms to enter the banking system under “lightly regulated” frameworks compared to the rigorous standards of traditional depository institutions. This legal challenge highlights a fundamental disagreement over whether the national trust bank designation should allow firms to preempt state law requirements while avoiding the federal mandates that govern traditional banks. With dozens of applications currently being submitted to the OCC, the outcome of this lawsuit will likely determine if the federal banking system remains an exclusive club for traditional lenders or transforms into a broader platform for digital asset firms.
With veteran leaders like Brandon Soto moving from traditional banking roles to these fintech trust banks, what specific internal disciplines are being prioritized to satisfy federal examiners?
The focus has shifted toward what I call the “discipline of transparency,” which is something Soto has honed over his twenty-year career sitting across from bank examiners at institutions like Square Financial and Green Dot. The primary objective is simple but rigorous: know exactly what assets you hold, know exactly who you hold them for, and keep them safe through daily reconciliation. In these new trust banks, the best answer an executive can give a regulator is a clean, reconciled balance sheet that demonstrates clear ownership and strong internal controls. By building these institutions with the right level of capital from day one, these leaders are trying to prove that innovation does not have to come at the cost of safety or soundness. It is a transition from the “move fast and break things” mentality to a culture of high-stakes fiduciary responsibility that mimics the operational backbone of the world’s largest banks.
What is your forecast for the role of national trust charters in the broader financial landscape over the next few years?
I expect that the national trust charter will become the definitive gold standard for any firm looking to scale digital asset custody or stablecoin operations on a global level. As we see more of these 21 recently approved or conditionally approved charters become fully operational, the pressure on state-level regulators will increase to harmonize their rules or risk losing relevance entirely. We are likely to see a period of intense consolidation where the winners are firms that can successfully marry the speed of fintech with the “boring” but essential reconciliation and capital standards required by the OCC. Ultimately, the success of this model will depend on whether these firms can maintain the trust of both the federal government and the institutional clients who are now demanding a federally regulated environment for their digital holdings.
