OCC Proposes New Rule for National Bank Charters 

On Jan. 12, the agency published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled “National Bank Chartering,” setting a Feb. 11 deadline for public comments. The move signals an effort to make the chartering process clearer and more predictable at a moment when technology-heavy business models—often backed by fintechs and other non-traditional entrants—are pressing for a path into the federal banking system.

A Ballard Spahr analysis frames the proposal as less of a policy U-turn and more of a housecleaning exercise: putting into formal regulation what has long lived across statutes, policy statements and supervisory practice. The OCC, the firm notes, has faced growing pressure to provide more transparency into how it evaluates charter applications, especially when applicants propose “novel or non-traditional business models.” For companies trying to plan capital, staffing and compliance investments years in advance, clearer expectations can be the difference between a viable application and a dead end.

At the core, the proposed rule aims to spell out what the OCC looks for when deciding whether a new national bank should exist in the first place—how it will be governed, how it will be funded, and whether it can manage risk while following the law. Per Ballard Spahr, several themes run through the NPRM: a push for clarity and transparency around the factors the OCC considers (including governance, capital, liquidity, risk management and compliance systems), and a bid for consistency so similar applications are reviewed using similar standards.

The OCC also acknowledges that new banks may rely heavily on technology or offer specialized products, but reiterates that every applicant is judged against the same baseline supervisory expectations.

“Rather than creating an entirely new chartering regime, the NPRM seeks to codify existing practices and make the chartering process more transparent for applicants, regulators, and the public,” according to Ballard Spahr. In plain terms, the OCC is proposing to write down—more explicitly—how it already makes charter calls, which could narrow the gray areas that often surround new or unconventional applicants.

Ballard Spahr notes that national charters are attractive in part because they offer a single federal charter with uniform supervision, can preempt some state laws, and may provide access to the federal banking system—along with the ability to fund through FDIC-insured deposits. Even “clarifications” in how charters are evaluated can reshape the strategic calculus for de novo banks, fintechs weighing whether to become banks, and incumbents exploring new structures.

Interested parties have until Feb. 11 to weigh in. Ballard Spahr suggests stakeholders may focus on whether the OCC has struck the right balance between transparency and retaining enough supervisory flexibility to deal with different business models without weakening traditional safety-and-soundness expectations. The post also flags a key practical point: deposit insurance is a separate FDIC process, and the firm says it will be watching whether the FDIC takes a similar approach. If the OCC finalizes the rule, Ballard Spahr expects it to shape national bank chartering “for years to come.”