On March 28, new guidance was released by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), clarifying that banks overseen by the agency can engage in cryptocurrency activities without needing prior approval, as long as they adhere to established safety and soundness standards to manage associated risks.
This announcement, identified as Financial Institution Letter (FIL-7-2025), abrogates FIL-16-2022 and signifies a notable shift in policy for the agency.
Acting Chairman Travis Hill remarked:
“With today’s action, the FDIC is making a fresh start after the flawed approach of the previous three years. I anticipate this will be one of several measures the FDIC will undertake to outline a new strategy for how banks can engage in crypto and blockchain-related activities in a manner consistent with safety and soundness standards.”
The FDIC plans to collaborate with the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets to provide further guidance and work together with other regulators to update previous interagency documents related to digital assets.
Bo Hines, Executive Director of the Presidential Working Group on Digital Assets Markets, described the decision as “a significant advancement towards innovation and adoption.”
The agency’s choice is part of a broader initiative to recalibrate its stance towards financial innovation.
‘Pause’ letters
In recent years, numerous banks aiming to engage in digital asset activities reportedly received informal “pause” letters, instructing them to cease their involvement with crypto services, including custody, tokenized deposits, and even everyday retail crypto offerings.
Individuals in the crypto sector have claimed these actions were part of “Operation Chokepoint 2.0,” a purported initiative by the previous administration aimed at stifling the growth of the crypto industry in the US.
Hill has condemned these measures for their lack of transparency and for fostering a belief that the FDIC was discouraging innovation through behind-the-scenes enforcement actions.
In a speech in January, he conceded that the agency had not provided banks with clear guidelines publicly, instead relying on inconsistent interventions.
He pointed out more than 20 instances where banks received letters requesting they halt or postpone crypto-related activities without formal rulemaking or public comment periods.
Call to reevaluate
Hill underscored that compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act should not serve as an excuse to deny access to banking services, advocating for a reassessment of how the BSA is enforced across financial institutions.
Recent discussions within the FDIC have reportedly centered on permitting banks to pursue tokenized deposit services and other blockchain-based financial infrastructure without unnecessary regulatory delays.
This move aligns the FDIC more closely with other regulators, such as the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which has begun developing formal frameworks for cryptocurrency regulation.
It also comes in response to increasing demands from industry stakeholders and lawmakers for banking regulators to establish a clear and consistent framework for lawful crypto-related services.
Mentioned in this article
