OCC clears national banks for riskless-principal crypto trades

On December 9, 2025, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued Interpretive Letter 1188, confirming that national banks may conduct riskless-principal transactions in crypto-assets with and on behalf of customers. The conclusion covered crypto-assets that are securities and, through the OCC’s broader “business of banking” analysis, crypto-assets that are not securities.

The development mattered because it placed a familiar brokerage structure inside the federal banking perimeter for digital assets. It did not authorize banks to build speculative crypto inventories, guarantee customers against losses or treat every crypto activity as permissible. The letter addressed a defined execution model and preserved ordinary safety, legal and supervisory conditions.

How the transaction works

In the structure described by the OCC, a bank purchases an asset from one counterparty for immediate resale to another. The first purchase is conditioned on an offsetting order, and the two legs execute effectively simultaneously. The bank acts in its own name as principal, but economically performs a broker-like intermediary role.

The word “riskless” is a term of market structure, not a promise that nothing can go wrong. The OCC said the intermediary assumes nominal settlement, market and credit risk. A bona fide settlement default can leave the bank holding the asset temporarily; the letter said the asset is typically sold as soon as possible in that rare circumstance.

That distinction is central to the permission. A bank does not ordinarily retain the crypto-asset in inventory after matching the customer-driven trades. Interpretive Letter 1188 therefore did not establish general authority to acquire crypto-assets as a directional investment.

Why the OCC found the activity permissible

For a crypto-asset that is a security, the OCC treated the transaction as an established riskless-principal securities activity under 12 U.S.C. § 24(Seventh). The more consequential analysis concerned crypto-assets that are not securities.

The agency applied factors in 12 C.F.R. § 7.1000(c)(1). It found the activity functionally equivalent to recognized bank brokerage, and a logical outgrowth of crypto custody services. It also reasoned that customers could obtain execution through a regulated bank rather than deal directly with less-regulated venues or pseudonymous counterparties, while the relevant risks resembled risks banks already manage in securities, derivatives, custody and settlement.

This interpretation connected execution to permissions the OCC had already recognized. The letter cited earlier authority for national banks to provide crypto custody and related trade-execution and settlement services, and May 2025 guidance allowing banks to buy and sell assets held in custody at a customer’s direction. The December 9 action made clear that acting momentarily as principal, with an offsetting order already in place, did not by itself put the activity outside banking powers.

What changed—and what did not

The immediate change was regulatory clarity for national banks and applicants considering this specific service. It potentially widened the set of regulated intermediaries through which customers could execute crypto trades, while allowing a bank to interpose itself between the customer and external counterparties.

The letter was not a product launch, a finding that any named bank was operationally ready, or a measure of customer demand. It set no transaction volume, asset list, implementation date or capital treatment. It also did not resolve whether a particular crypto-asset is a security; instead, it explained why the described structure can be permissible under either branch of its analysis.

The OCC required the activity to be conducted safely and soundly and in compliance with applicable law. It said it would examine riskless-principal crypto activity through ongoing supervision, and warned that different facts and circumstances could produce a different conclusion.

No price or percentage claim is made here. Same-day reporting noted a broader crypto-market rally, but the surviving record does not isolate Interpretive Letter 1188 as its cause. The verifiable December 9 development is narrower and more durable: the U.S. national-bank regulator confirmed a defined, customer-driven route for bank-intermediated crypto execution.