The Independent Community Bankers of America filed suit against the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency on October 2, 2026, in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking to invalidate a rule that lets non-fiduciary digital asset companies obtain national trust bank charters.

The complaint targets an OCC final rule issued on March 2, 2026, which created a path to national trust charters for entities whose core business is not strictly fiduciary. The rule widened the charter's scope to include non-fiduciary custody, allowing firms that hold assets for safekeeping without the broader duties of a trustee to operate under the same federal framework as established trust banks.

ICBA argues the OCC exceeded its statutory authority under the National Bank Act, with the group contending the regulator effectively rewrote its own job description without congressional authorization.

What does the rule change?

The March 2, 2026 final rule marked a structural shift at the OCC. Prior interpretations restricted national trust charters to entities engaged in fiduciary activities. The new rule treats non-fiduciary custody as a qualifying activity, pulling digital asset custodians, certain payment firms, and other non-bank actors into the federal banking system's perimeter for the first time.

For crypto firms, the appeal is operational. A national trust charter replaces a patchwork of state money transmitter and custody licenses with a single federal license, a defined supervisory regime, and OCC examiners.

What does the lawsuit challenge?

ICBA's complaint presses three overlapping arguments. First, the group says the OCC read its own chartering authority too broadly and stretched the National Bank Act beyond its text. Second, the rule lets charter holders avoid obligations that fall on traditional banks, including the Community Reinvestment Act and FDIC insurance coverage. Third, ICBA warns that uninsured digital asset firms operating under a federal charter could sidestep state consumer protection regimes.

ICBA President and CEO Rebeca Romero Rainey said the national trust charter was never intended to be a "side door" for digital asset companies. She added that these firms often lack the federal consumer protections the public typically associates with traditional banks.

Who is on the radar?

The lawsuit lands against the backdrop of charter applications that have drawn sustained opposition from community lenders. Names on that list include Coinbase National Trust and Ripple, both of which have pursued OCC charters since at least 2025. ICBA's complaint frames the rule as the legal scaffolding for those applications.

What are the stakes?

The case pits community banks against a federal regulator that has spent three years opening its charter book to non-bank financial firms. Traditional banks carry CRA, FDIC, and capital obligations that a digital asset custodian under a trust charter does not. ICBA's filing asks the court to level that field, or at least require Congress to authorize the difference.

For the OCC, the case tests whether the agency's interpretive reach can survive a direct statutory challenge. A ruling against the agency would force a reset of the entire non-fiduciary charter program and leave pending applicants in regulatory limbo.

What happens next?

• The OCC's formal response in the District of Columbia court
• Any motion to stay the March 2 rule while litigation proceeds
• Amicus filings from banking trade groups or crypto industry associations
• The disposition of pending applications from Coinbase National Trust, Ripple, and other digital asset firms whose approval windows now depend on the court's reading of the National Bank Act