/regulation & compliance

News and resources on regulation, compliance, legal and governance issues for banks and fintechs.

US regulators must take reins on fintech oversight - bank associations

US financial services regulators should take the reins on fintech oversight and stop expecting banks to independently police the sector, say the Bank Policy Institute and the Clearing House Association.

  1 1 comment

US regulators must take reins on fintech oversight - bank associations

Editorial

This content has been selected, created and edited by the Finextra editorial team based upon its relevance and interest to our community.

Earlier this year, in the wake of the collapse of Synapse, US regulators set out proposals for an overhaul of how bank-fintech relationships are governed.

Replying to a request for information from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Federal Reserve, the Bank Policy Institute and the Clearing House Association have backed the idea of stronger fintech oversight.

“We believe the combination of direct agency oversight of fintechs and consumer education is imperative to achieve our shared goal of effective fintech risk management,” the associations write in their letter.

“The current approach, in which the agencies place all responsibility for ensuring appropriate fintech risk management on the banks, suggests that compliance is primarily a ‘bank issue’ and need not be a major concern for the fintech.”

In a separate letter, the Independent Community Bankers of America says that the current regulatory framework has "significant shortcomings" and suggests the use of ‘just in time’ reviews, enhanced examination of novel technologies, and supervised use of variables.

The group also calls for the use of economies of scale to more effectively map and monitor the complex or critical third-party relationships through the use of shared due diligence and standard setting organisations.

In contrast, the Financial Technology Association CEO Penny Lee writes: “We urge regulators to recognize the benefits of these partnerships and reconsider rulemakings that could cut off access to innovative financial services for tens of millions of consumers, small businesses, and entrepreneurs.”

The letter highlights two specific proposed FDIC rules - the brokered deposit and custodial deposit accounts rulemakings - which could have "unintended consequences and undermine access to innovative financial products".

Sponsored [On-Demand Webinar] Reaping the benefits of Hyper-Personalisation with AI and Application Modernisation

Comments: (1)

Ketharaman Swaminathan

Ketharaman Swaminathan Founder and CEO at GTM360 Marketing Solutions

I'm guessing US regulators wanted to act cool and innovative and be perceived as supporting democratization of financial services to help the American J6P achieve the American Dream of ... It was "home ownership" in the runup to GFC in 200x, not sure what it is now. They fulfilled their wish by maintaining an arms length with Neobank, BaaS and other Fintech Cool Cats. Eventually, what had to happen happened. Now that the S has hit the F, regulators don't want to get exposed, ergo they're forcing banks to police the fintech cool cats. Thankfully, smart US banks have seen through the regulators' ruse and are pushing back. I totally support the banks's POV. Regulators should regulate fintech and bear the risk of thwarting innovation in the process. They shouldn't be allowed to have their regulation cake and eat innovation too. 

[Webinar] Reaping the benefits of Hyper-Personalisation with AI and Application ModernisationFinextra Promoted[On-Demand Webinar] Reaping the benefits of Hyper-Personalisation with AI and Application Modernisation