John Deaton blasts the ABA for urging U.S. regulators to block Ripple and Circle from getting federal bank licenses.
After the American Bankers Association (ABA) recently pleaded with the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) to stop federal trust charters for cryptocurrency companies like Ripple and Circle, John Deaton has responded angrily.
Circle, Ripple Face New Banking Lobby Opposition
Deaton told lawmakers to disregard what he described as the American Bankers Association’s obstructionist attempts in a recent X post.
The ABA and five other business associations formally requested his condemnation, including the National Bankers Association and America’s Credit Unions.
They asked the OCC to postpone approving crypto trust charters until more extensive public review is feasible.
Prominent specialist Vincent Van Code concurred with Deaton, calling the action “purely anti-competitive.”
He maintained that by cutting costs and red tape, digital-first businesses like Circle and Ripple are revolutionizing the financial industry.
The century is over. It is now time for the next Gen finance to replace the cabal.
Nothing can stop Ripple and XRP. If democracy is real, then the voice of millions of crypto supporters should matter.
Ripple applied for a national banking license from the OCC to incorporate its stablecoin and payment services into the established financial system.
Similarly, Circle applied to operate as a federally regulated national trust bank.
The new company, First National Digital Currency Bank, would hold some of the reserves for Circle’s main stablecoin, USDC.
Banking Groups Point To Systemic Risk, Legal Gaps
The ABA’s main contention is that national trust bank charters must be granted exclusively to companies that carry out fiduciary functions, as previously mandated by 12 U.S.C. § 92a.
The ABA claims neither Circle nor Ripple intends to offer these conventional services.
Instead, they aim to get federal banking privileges, primarily on digital asset payments and custody.
The letter cautioned that approving these applications may create a risky precedent that would let non-fiduciary cryptocurrency companies get around the Bank Holding Company Act and other regulations that traditional banks have to abide by.
The organizations also expressed worries about potential “copycat” applications, speculating that dozens of digital asset companies would enter the financial system after Ripple and Circle without complying with the exact legal requirements.
The GENIUS Act, which was passed in July 2025 and mandates that stablecoin issuers function under federal supervision as banks, credit unions, or specially chartered non-banks under OCC supervision, is in line with Ripple and Circle’s application for a banking license.
By pursuing these licenses, Circle and Ripple may be able to increase their product offerings and satisfy regulatory requirements.
However, according to the ABA, this would result in specific disparities.
They also attacked the OCC’s previous interpretive guidelines, particularly the now-rescinded Interpretive Letter 1179, which permitted more expansive, case-by-case definitions of fiduciary activity.
The American Bar Association now demands that the stricter, more unambiguous rules of “no fiduciary work, no trust charter” be reinstated.
Banking industry critics claim that these applications go against the fundamental purpose of federal trust charters and endanger systemic stability.
Deaton and other proponents contend that preventing Ripple and Circle from operating stifles competition and innovation, maintaining the banking system’s reliance on antiquated models.
