Ripple Wins Final OCC Approval for National Trust Bank

Ripple’s final approval for a national trust bank puts federal supervision closer to the reserves and custody services behind its digital-asset business.

Ripple announced the approval on October 26, 2026. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s application record independently lists that date as the charter transaction’s effective date, following approval on December 12, 2025.

Key points

• Ripple National Trust Bank’s approved activities center on RLUSD reserves, collateral trustee services and fiduciary digital-asset custody.

• Standard Custody & Trust Company will remain the issuer of RLUSD under New York supervision.

• The charter is limited to trust-company activities. The OCC’s conditional decision specifies that the institution will not be an FDIC-insured depository institution.

What the Ripple bank charter covers

Ripple says the bank is authorized to manage segregated reserves supporting Ripple USD, or RLUSD, and act as collateral trustee for the benefit of token holders. Upon opening, it will also be authorized to provide fiduciary digital-asset custody. The announcement does not establish that those operations have already begun.

The structure separates two jobs that can easily be confused in a bank-charter headline: issuing a stablecoin and overseeing the assets supporting it. Standard Custody, Ripple’s New York Department of Financial Services-regulated trust company, continues issuing RLUSD. The national trust bank adds OCC supervision around its approved reserve and custody functions.

That distinction matters when evaluating a potential provider. A recognizable banking label is useful context, but the legal entity performing each service, its permitted activities, and the protections attached to the customer’s particular assets remain the practical questions.

Federal supervision with a defined scope

The OCC’s December 2025 decision limited the proposed bank to trust-company operations and related activities in its business plan. It approved fiduciary collateral trustee and cryptocurrency custody services, while stating that the bank did not plan to issue stablecoins. Those boundaries do not support treating this approval as a broad commercial-lending license.

Ripple’s application was part of a wider regulatory development. In December 2025, the OCC conditionally approved five national trust bank applications, including new charters for Ripple and First National Digital Currency Bank and conversions for BitGo, Fidelity Digital Assets and Paxos. The agency said the applicants would join approximately 60 national trust banks it already supervised, subject to satisfying its conditions. Those were conditional approvals at that time, not evidence that every applicant has since opened.

The broader implication is that digital-asset services are increasingly being organized inside familiar supervisory structures. The significance comes from the responsibilities those structures impose, not simply the ability to put “bank” in a company name.

Sale

CAPITAL AFTER HOURS 4

December 3, 2026, 6:30 – 9:30 PMSixty Vines Fort Lauderdale

Register Now

The operational test comes next

RLUSD is designed to track the U.S. dollar and is backed by dollar deposits, U.S. Treasuries and cash equivalents. Ripple describes uses across payments, treasury, and collateral workflows, with availability depending on jurisdiction. Its transparency program publishes independent monthly reserve attestations. These are relevant features for institutions evaluating the product, though they do not replace scrutiny of redemption terms or operational controls.

For funders and fintech providers, the useful question is whether infrastructure like this can improve an actual workflow: moving funds, managing liquidity, or safeguarding assets. The charter alone does not establish lower transaction costs, faster access to business financing or a new source of lending capital.

Before integrating a stablecoin into a financing or payments process, firms would still need to assess conversion costs, redemption access, reconciliation, compliance obligations, and the consequences of a service interruption. Federal supervision can inform that review; it cannot do the review for them.