Skip to main content
Marsh logo

Article

Key considerations for digital assets firms after OCC conditional bank charter approvals

Key risk considerations for digital asset firms after OCC conditional bank charter approvals in the United States.

05/02/2026 · 5 minute read

Milestone achieved, risks amplified

In December 2025, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), an independent office of the US Department of the Treasury, granted conditional approval for the national trust bank charters of five digital-asset firms: First National Digital Currency Bank (Circle), Ripple National Trust Bank (Ripple), Paxos Trust Company, Fidelity Digital Assets, and BitGo Bank & Trust. This development represents more than regulatory paperwork; it signals a fundamental shift in how US regulators view crypto-native firms operating within the traditional banking framework.

Decoding conditional approval

A conditional OCC bank charter approval is an in principle green light, but full activation depends on meeting pre opening conditions and passing comprehensive examinations. Once operational, these entities will function as federally chartered national trust banks, subject to the same bank grade obligations for governance, capital adequacy, and operational resilience that apply to traditional banks. 

Three firms — Paxos, BitGo, and Fidelity Digital Assets — will convert existing state trust charters into national frameworks, while Circle and Ripple received approval for de novo national trust banks . The practical effect is that these firms will assume formal trust and custodial responsibilities, face ongoing federal examinations, and must satisfy both the Federal Reserve and the OCC’s expectations before opening their doors to business.

Why this matters

This cluster of approvals represents more than incremental progress — it is a significant milestone in digital asset regulation . Following the passage of the GENIUS Act, these approvals will acknowledge digital asset firms’ progress toward bank-grade controls and governance. For stablecoin issuers, custody providers, and settlement platforms, federal charters offer greater clarity for institutional counterparties, potential access to Federal Reserve services, and a clearer path for scaling regulated products across state lines. 

Perhaps most significantly, these approvals reflect a broader shift: regulators are increasingly willing to integrate crypto-native activities into the banking system — provided firms can demonstrate they meet the rigorous standards expected of any financial institution.

Key risk considerations for firms to navigate

With opportunity comes responsibility. National trust bank status can bring heightened expectations across multiple dimensions:

1. Heightened scrutiny on digital asset theft risk

What changes: OCC examinations will test security controls, and shortcomings may lead to supervisory actions or consent orders. 

Potential insurance implications: Crime insurance policies can cover digital asset theft and private key compromise. While full one-to-one asset coverage is often impractical due to market capacity constraints and asset volatility, insurance policies can be structured to cover maximum probable losses and support coordinated claims handling. Legacy cyber or crime policies that are not tailored to explicitly cover digital assets are generally insufficient.

2. Operational and fiduciary liability

What changes: As national trust banks, these firms accept formal fiduciary duties for client assets, whether held in custody, held to facilitate settlement, or held as segregated reserves backing issued stablecoins. Expectations include stricter segregation, traceable recordkeeping, and robust operational playbooks. Operational failures carry heightened regulatory and client consequences. 

Potential insurance implications: Errors and omissions (E&O) coverage and professional indemnity (PI) must not exclude blockchain specific acts and errors (endorsements for smart contract, ledger, and key management issues). Appropriate limits are essential to avoid uninsured balance sheet exposure.

3. Regulatory compliance and enforcement risk

What changes: Transitioning to federal charter status means submitting to OCC supervision across capital requirements, liquidity management, AML/BSA compliance, and governance structures. Pre-opening conditions may explicitly require specific insurance arrangements, and the OCC retains authority to modify or suspend charter privileges for non-compliance. 

Potential insurance implications: Directors and officers (D&O) insurance must be fit for federal scrutiny. Coverage must be designed to withstand federal regulatory scrutiny, with robust provisions for investigations, defence costs, and personal liability protection (Side A coverage). Insurance adequacy is not just desirable; it is likely to be a regulatory checkpoint that could delay charter activation if inadequate.

4. Third party and outsourcing risk

What changes: Digital asset operations typically rely on a complex ecosystem of third-party providers: wallet technology vendors, blockchain node operators, cloud infrastructure, and specialised service providers. The OCC will expect sophisticated third party risk management: due diligence, contractual indemnities, active monitoring, and viable exit planning. If  vendors fail, whether through breaches or service interruptions, the consequences can be passed on to the insured firm.

Potential insurance implications: Insureds must be aware of whether programmes include contingent vendor coverage  or whether clear contractual risk transfers are in place with vendors. Cyber policies may respond to vendor-related breaches or service outages, while crime policies can protect against third-party fraud or theft impacting the insured.

5. Capital and liquidity strain

What changes: The OCC expects conservative capital and liquidity buffers that account for digital asset specific risks: reserve volatility, potential for rapid customer outflows, and market turbulence. Failure to maintain adequate capital or liquidity can threaten the firm’s solvency and operational continuity.

Potential insurance implications: While insurance cannot replace capital or liquidity, it can support financial resources by protecting them. Crime insurance can cover losses from internal fraud or control failures that might otherwise erode capital positions, while cyber insurance can mitigate the financial impact of operational disruptions that affect business continuity.

Looking ahead

As these five digital asset firms progress toward full national trust bank status and others consider pursuing similar paths, the evolving regulatory landscape demands a proactive and holistic approach to risk management. 

Organisations should prioritise robust technical controls, comprehensive governance frameworks, and clear operational resilience strategies to meet federal expectations. Equally important is the alignment of tailored insurance programs that address the unique exposures arising from digital asset custody, fiduciary duties, cyber threats, and regulatory scrutiny.

Marsh’s Digital Asset Risk team stands ready to support firms navigating this complex transition. By combining deep industry expertise with strong market relationships, we help design bespoke risk and insurance solutions that not only protect against emerging threats but also demonstrate preparedness to regulators and underwriters alike. Early engagement with Marsh can facilitate readiness reviews, underwriting workshops, and strategic insurance placements — equipping your organisation to capitalise on this milestone while managing amplified risks with confidence and agility.

For further information on how Marsh can assist with your digital asset risk management and insurance needs, please contact us.

Learn how our digital assets team can support your organisation with risk transfer solutions

Send an enquiry

Related insights

Busy office with a productive team of employees working hard and fast to complete tasks and projects. Colleagues, coworkers or business people in a modern workplace being creative.

Article

Talent as a strategic risk: Why mid-tier firms must rethink workforce resilience in 2026

13/01/2026
Abstract technology background. Artificial intelligence.

Article

Marsh’s digital trading journey

12/12/2025
Chatbot chat with AI Artificial Intelligence, man using technology smart robot

Article

Safeguarding digital assets

02/12/2025
Factory worker doing inspection in factory

Article

HSE prosecutions: will your D&O insurance protect you?

11/11/2025
View more