[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 242 (Friday, December 19, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59409-59418]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-23510]



[[Page 59409]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

12 CFR Part 303

RIN 3064-AG20


Approval Requirements for Issuance of Payment Stablecoins by 
Subsidiaries of FDIC-Supervised Insured Depository Institutions

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is soliciting 
comments on a proposal that would establish procedures to be followed 
by an insured State nonmember bank or State savings association (each, 
an FDIC-supervised institution) that seeks to obtain FDIC approval to 
issue payment stablecoins through a subsidiary pursuant to the Guiding 
and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (GENIUS 
Act).

DATES: Comments must be received by the FDIC no later than February 17, 
2026.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 3064-AG20, by any 
of the following methods:
     FDIC Website: https://www.fdic.gov/federal-register-publications. Follow instructions for submitting comments on the agency 
website.
     Email: [email protected]. Include RIN 3064-AG20 in the 
subject line of the message.
     Mail: Jennifer M. Jones, Deputy Executive Secretary, 
Attention: Comments--RIN 3064-AG20, Federal Deposit Insurance 
Corporation, 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20429.
     Hand Delivery to FDIC: Comments may be hand-delivered to 
the guard station at the rear of the 550 17th Street NW building 
(located on F Street) on business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
     Public Inspection: Comments received, including any 
personal information provided, may be posted without change to https://www.fdic.gov/federal-register-publications. Commenters should submit 
only information that the commenter wishes to make available publicly. 
The FDIC may review, redact, or refrain from posting all or any portion 
of any comment that it may deem to be inappropriate for publication, 
such as irrelevant or obscene material. The FDIC may post only a single 
representative example of identical or substantially identical 
comments, and in such cases will generally identify the number of 
identical or substantially identical comments represented by the posted 
example. All comments that have been redacted, as well as those that 
have not been posted, that contain comments on the merits of the 
proposed rule will be retained in the public comment file and will be 
considered as required under all applicable laws. All comments may be 
accessible under the Freedom of Information Act.
    This proposal, all comments received, and a summary of not more 
than 100 words of the proposed rule pursuant to the Providing 
Accountability Through Transparency Act of 2023 are available at 
https://www.fdic.gov/federal-register-publications.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alfred L. Seivold, Acting Senior 
Deputy Director, (415) 808-8248, [email protected], Division of Complex 
Institution Supervision and Resolution; Sandra Macias, Acting Associate 
Director, (202) 898-3642, [email protected], Division of Risk Management 
Supervision; Nicholas Simons, Counsel, (202) 898-6785, 
[email protected]; Chantal Hernandez, Counsel, (202) 898-7388, 
[email protected]; Eugene Frenkel, Fin-Tech Counsel, (202) 898-3578, 
[email protected], Legal Division.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Policy Objectives

    The FDIC is issuing this notice of proposed rulemaking (proposed 
rule) to implement certain application provisions under the GENIUS Act 
(or the Act).\1\ The proposed rule would establish a tailored 
application process for an FDIC-supervised institution to obtain 
approval from the FDIC to issue payment stablecoins \2\ through a 
subsidiary. The FDIC seeks to evaluate the safety and soundness of an 
applicant's proposed activities based on consideration of statutory 
factors and support the responsible growth and use of digital assets 
and related technologies \3\ while minimizing the regulatory burden on 
applicants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 119-27, 139 Stat. 419 (codified at 12 U.S.C. 
5901-5916).
    \2\ See 12 U.S.C. 5902. The GENIUS Act defines a payment 
stablecoin as a digital asset 1) that is, or is designed to be, used 
as a means of payment or settlement and 2) the issuer of which is 
obligated to convert, redeem, or repurchase for a fixed amount of 
monetary value and represents or creates the reasonable expectation 
that it will maintain a stable value relative to a fixed amount of 
monetary value. 12 U.S.C. 5901(22)(A). The GENIUS Act further 
provides that a payment stablecoin is not a national currency, 
deposit, or security. 12 U.S.C. 5901(22)(B). Stablecoins that are 
used or designed for other purposes, such as non-payment 
stablecoins, are outside the scope of this proposed rule.
    \3\ See Executive Order 14178, Strengthening American Leadership 
in Digital Financial Technology, 90 FR 8647 (Jan. 31, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background and Authority

A. GENIUS Act Overview

    The GENIUS Act was enacted on July 18, 2025, and will become 
effective on January 18, 2027, or 120 days after the date on which the 
primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators \4\ issue any final 
implementing regulations, if earlier.\5\ This proposed rule, once 
finalized, will implement the Federal statutory framework for 
applications for issuance of payment stablecoins and related payment 
stablecoin activities by subsidiaries of FDIC-supervised institutions 
for which the FDIC is the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator, 
as defined under section 2 of the Act.\6\ A subsidiary of an insured 
depository institution (IDI) \7\ that has been approved to issue 
payment stablecoins under section 5 of the GENIUS Act is a permitted 
payment stablecoin issuer, or PPSI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators are the 
FDIC, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Board 
of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB), and the National 
Credit Union Administration (NCUA). See 12 U.S.C. 5901(25).
    \5\ Section 20 of the GENIUS Act, governing the effective date, 
is codified in the note to 12 U.S.C. 5901.
    \6\ 12 U.S.C. 5901(25).
    \7\ ``Insured depository institution'' is defined in section 
2(15) of the GENIUS Act, 12 U.S.C. 5901(15). The GENIUS Act uses the 
term ``insured depository institution'' to refer to both an insured 
depository institution, as defined in section 3 of the Federal 
Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act) (12 U.S.C. 1813) and an insured 
credit union, as defined in section 101 of the Federal Credit Union 
Act (12 U.S.C. 1752).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the GENIUS Act, subject to certain limited exceptions, only a 
PPSI may issue a payment stablecoin in the United States. A PPSI is a 
person \8\ formed in the United States that is (1) a subsidiary of an 
IDI approved by its primary Federal payment stablecoin regulator; (2) a 
Federal qualified payment stablecoin issuer approved by the OCC; or (3) 
a State-qualified payment stablecoin issuer approved by its State 
payment stablecoin regulator.\9\ With respect to a PPSI that is a 
subsidiary of an IDI, the PPSI's primary Federal payment stablecoin 
regulator is the same as the IDI's appropriate Federal banking agency 
under section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance (FDI)

[[Page 59410]]

Act or the National Credit Union Administration, as applicable.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The GENIUS Act defines a ``person'' as an individual, 
partnership, company, corporation, association, trust, estate, 
cooperative organization, or other business entity, incorporated or 
unincorporated. 12 U.S.C. 5091(24).
    \9\ See 12 U.S.C. 5901(23).
    \10\ See 12 U.S.C. 5901(1), (23), (25)(A); 12 U.S.C. 5904.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FDIC is the appropriate Federal banking agency of each IDI that 
is a State-chartered insured bank that is not a member of the Federal 
Reserve System (State non-member bank) \11\ and each State-chartered 
savings association (State savings association) (collectively, as noted 
above, FDIC-supervised institutions).\12\ Accordingly, an FDIC-
supervised institution must obtain approval for its subsidiary PPSI 
from the FDIC pursuant to the GENIUS Act and, once the application is 
approved, the FDIC will supervise that PPSI as its primary Federal 
payment stablecoin regulator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The term ``State nonmember bank'' includes any insured 
State bank that is an industrial bank, industrial loan company, or 
other similar institution that is excluded from the definition of 
``bank'' in section 2(c)(2)(H) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 
U.S.C. 1841(c)(2)(H)). See FDI Act section 3(a)(2) (12 U.S.C. 
1813(a)(2)); 12 CFR part 347.
    \12\ See 12 U.S.C. 1813(q). As of September 30, 2025, the FDIC 
supervises approximately 2,772 insured State nonmember banks and 
insured State savings associations. FDIC Call Report Data, September 
30, 2025. The FDIC is also the appropriate Federal banking agency of 
any foreign bank having an insured State branch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Statutory Requirements and Authority for Approving PPSI Applications

1. Authority To Accept and Process PPSI Applications
    Section 5 of the GENIUS Act directs the FDIC, and the other primary 
Federal payment stablecoin regulators, to establish a process and 
Federal framework for the licensing, regulation, examination, and 
supervision of PPSIs that prioritizes the safety and soundness of such 
entities.\13\ As required by the GENIUS Act, this proposed rule would 
establish a process and Federal framework for the acceptance and 
processing of PPSI applications \14\ from FDIC-supervised institutions 
that is consistent with the requirements of the Act.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 12 U.S.C. 5904(a)(1)(B).
    \14\ See 12 U.S.C. 5904(a)(2).
    \15\ See 12 U.S.C. 5904(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Overview of the Application Process
    In connection with the processing of applications to issue payment 
stablecoins, section 5 of the GENIUS Act includes specific timelines, 
evaluation criteria, and appeal rights for denied applicants.
    The FDIC is required to evaluate and make a determination on a 
substantially complete application \16\ using the factors listed in 
section 5(c) of the GENIUS Act, including the subsidiary's ability to 
meet statutory and regulatory requirements and other factors related to 
management and safety and soundness.\17\ These factors are discussed in 
greater detail in section II.B.3 of this document. The GENIUS Act 
provides that the FDIC shall only deny an application upon determining 
that the activities of the applicant (including the proposed activities 
of the subsidiary) would be unsafe or unsound based on the factors.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The GENIUS Act provides that an application is 
substantially complete if it contains sufficient information for the 
FDIC to render a decision on whether the applicant satisfies 
specified statutory factors. See 12 U.S.C. 5904(d)(1)(B)(i). For 
applications pending as of the effective date of the GENIUS Act, 
section 5(f) of the Act authorizes the FDIC to provide a safe harbor 
for an FDIC-supervised institution's subsidiary and waive 
requirements under the GENIUS Act for up to 12 months from the Act's 
effective date. 12 U.S.C. 5904(f).
    \17\ See 12 U.S.C. 5904(c).
    \18\ 12 U.S.C. 5904(d)(2)(A)(i). The GENIUS Act provides that 
the issuance of a payment stablecoin on an open, public, or 
decentralized network is not a valid basis for denying an 
application. 12 U.S.C. 5904(d)(2)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the FDIC denies an application, it must provide the applicant 
with an opportunity to appeal. The GENIUS Act sets forth specific 
timelines for requesting an appeal, holding a hearing, and issuing a 
final decision, but is silent on the modus for appeal.\19\ Lastly, the 
GENIUS Act states that a denial does not prohibit an applicant from 
filing a subsequent application.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 12 U.S.C. 5904(d)(2)(C).
    \20\ 12 U.S.C. 5904(d)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Required Factors for the Evaluation of Applications
a. Ability To Meet Requirements for Issuing Payment Stablecoins Under 
Section 4 of the GENIUS Act
    When evaluating an application, section 5(c)(1) of the GENIUS Act 
provides that the FDIC is required to consider the ability of the IDI's 
subsidiary, based on financial condition and resources, to meet the 
requirements for issuing payment stablecoins set forth in section 4 of 
the GENIUS Act.\21\ Section 4 sets out standards for the issuance of 
payment stablecoins by PPSIs.\22\ Section 4 requires that a PPSI 
maintain identifiable reserves backing the outstanding payment 
stablecoins on at least a 1 to 1 basis, comprised of specified 
categories of reserves,\23\ and the ability to relatedly meet the 
monthly reserve disclosure requirements applicable to a PPSI. The 
reserve disclosure requirements include disclosing the composition of 
the PPSI's reserves on its website \24\ and submitting to the FDIC 
certified reports examined by a public accounting firm regarding the 
prior month's reserve composition disclosure.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 12 U.S.C. 5903.
    \22\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a).
    \23\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(1)(A).
    \24\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(1)(C).
    \25\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(3)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the FDIC is required to consider the ability of the 
IDI's subsidiary, based on financial condition and resources, to comply 
with forthcoming regulations to be issued by the FDIC regarding capital 
requirements; liquidity requirements; reserve asset diversification; 
and operational, compliance, and information technology risk management 
principles-based requirements and standards, including Bank Secrecy Act 
(BSA) and sanctions compliance standards.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(4)(A). The FDIC is currently developing 
proposed regulations that will be issued for public comment. Section 
4(a)(5) of the GENIUS Act treats a PPSI as a financial institution 
for purposes of the BSA and subjects the PPSI to all applicable 
Federal laws relating to economic sanctions, prevention of money 
laundering, customer identification, and due diligence. See 12 
U.S.C. 5903(a)(5)(A). The FDIC will consider any BSA and sanctions 
regulations that may be issued by the U.S. Department of the 
Treasury.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 4 also establishes certain limitations on a PPSI's 
activities and generally only permits PPSIs to issue and redeem payment 
stablecoins, manage related reserves, provide certain payment 
stablecoin and reserve custodial and safekeeping services,\27\ 
undertake other activities that directly support those activities,\28\ 
and engage in digital asset service provider activities.\29\ In 
addition, section 4 establishes, subject to limited exceptions, a 
prohibition on pledging, rehypothecating, or reusing a PPSI's reserves 
assets.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ If federally supervised, an approved PPSI can engage in 
custody and safekeeping services for payment stablecoin reserves, 
payment stablecoins used as collateral, and private keys used to 
issue permitted payment stablecoins. See 12 U.S.C. 5909(a).
    \28\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(7)(A). In addition to payment stablecoin 
activities of the PPSI, the FDIC-supervised institution may engage 
in certain payment stablecoin activities pursuant to section 16(b) 
of the GENIUS Act. See 12 U.S.C. 5915(b). Issuance, however, is 
limited to the PPSI, which is the FDIC-supervised institution's 
subsidiary.
    \29\ See 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(7)(B); 12 U.S.C. 5901(7) (defining 
digital asset service provider).
    \30\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Factors Related to Management
    The FDIC is also required to consider factors related to management 
described in sections 5(c)(2) and 5(c)(3) of the GENIUS Act. Section 
5(c)(2) requires the FDIC to consider whether an individual that has 
been convicted of a felony

[[Page 59411]]

offense involving insider trading, embezzlement, cybercrime, money 
laundering, financing of terrorism, or financial fraud is serving as an 
officer or director of the applicant.\31\ Section 5(c)(3) requires the 
FDIC to consider the competence, experience, and integrity of the 
officers, directors, and principal shareholders of the applicant, its 
subsidiaries, and parent company, including the record of compliance 
with laws and regulations and ability to fulfill any commitments and 
conditions of the FDIC in connection with the application and prior 
applications.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 12 U.S.C. 5904(c)(2).
    \32\ 12 U.S.C. 5904(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Redemption Policy
    Under section 5(c)(4) of the GENIUS Act, the FDIC is required to 
consider whether the applicant's redemption policy can meet the 
standards specified under section 4(a)(1)(B).\33\ This includes whether 
the applicant has established clear and conspicuous procedures for 
timely redemption of outstanding payment stablecoins; \34\ whether the 
PPSI will publicly, clearly, and conspicuously disclose, in plain 
language, all fees associated with purchasing or redeeming its payment 
stablecoins; \35\ and whether the PPSI will meet the prohibition on 
changing such fees without at least 7 days' prior notice to 
consumers.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 12 U.S.C. 5904(c)(4).
    \34\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(1)(B)(i).
    \35\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(1)(B)(ii).
    \36\ 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(1)(B)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Other Factors
    Lastly, section 5(c)(5) of the GENIUS Act allows the FDIC to 
establish and consider any other factors as necessary to ensure the 
safety and soundness of the PPSI when evaluating an application.\37\ 
The FDIC is not proposing to establish any additional factors pursuant 
to section 5(c)(5) of the GENIUS Act at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 12 U.S.C. 5904(c)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Description of the Proposed Rule

A. Overview of the Proposed Application Procedures

    To implement the statutory requirements described above, the 
proposed rule would add a new Sec.  303.252 to title 12, part 303, 
subpart M of the FDIC Rules and Regulations, titled ``Permitted payment 
stablecoin issuers.'' This new section would apply to FDIC-supervised 
institutions that seek to issue payment stablecoins through a 
subsidiary. The proposed rule, as described below, addresses scope; 
definitions; filing location; contents of the filing; additional 
information for applications; processing decisions; and hearing and 
appeal procedures and final determination. The proposed rule would 
implement the requirements of section 5 of the GENIUS Act with respect 
to evaluating the factors, processing applications within specified 
timeframes, and establishing an appeal process. As required under the 
GENIUS Act, the FDIC would only deny an application if the activities 
of the applicant would be unsafe or unsound based on the factors 
described in section 5(c) of the Act.

B. Description of Proposed Application Procedures

1. Scope
    Paragraph (a) of proposed Sec.  303.252 would establish the scope 
of the proposed section. It would state that proposed Sec.  303.252 
sets forth the application requirements and procedures for an FDIC-
supervised institution to submit an application to issue payment 
stablecoins through a subsidiary that would become a PPSI under the 
GENIUS Act.
2. Definitions
    Paragraph (b) would define relevant terms for purposes of proposed 
Sec.  303.252. The term ``applicant'' would mean an FDIC-insured State 
nonmember bank or an FDIC-insured State savings association that seeks 
to issue payment stablecoins through a subsidiary. This definition 
would distinguish the applicant--the FDIC-supervised institution--from 
the PPSI subsidiary through which the institution would issue payment 
stablecoins and perform certain other payment stablecoin activities 
permitted by the GENIUS Act. ``Digital asset service provider,'' 
``payment stablecoin,'' and ``permitted payment stablecoin issuer'' 
would be defined by referencing the relevant definitions in section 2 
of the GENIUS Act. The terms ``State nonmember bank,'' ``State savings 
association,'' and ``subsidiary'' would have the meanings given those 
terms in section 3 of the FDI Act.\38\ Finally, the term 
``substantially complete'' would be defined in a manner consistent with 
the standard set forth in section 5(d)(1)(B)(i) of the GENIUS Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ Section 3(w)(4) of the FDI Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(w)(4)) 
states that the term ``subsidiary'' (1) means any company which is 
owned or controlled directly or indirectly by another company; and 
(2) includes any service corporation owned in whole or in part by an 
insured depository institution or any subsidiary of such a service 
corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Filing Location
    Paragraph (c) of proposed Sec.  303.252 would state that 
applications under the new section shall be filed with the appropriate 
FDIC region, as defined in 12 CFR 303.2(g), which is consistent with 
the FDIC's practice for receiving other types of applications.
4. Contents of Filing
    Paragraph (d) of proposed Sec.  303.252 would describe the contents 
of the filing. Under the proposed rule, the applicant would submit 
information to the FDIC in the form of a letter application that would 
contain the information listed in the regulation, to the extent 
applicable. Paragraph (d) would minimize the regulatory burden for 
applicants by requesting only information necessary to evaluate the 
factors to be considered under section 5(c) of the GENIUS Act and to 
determine the safety and soundness of the proposed activities of the 
applicant, inclusive of the activities of its subsidiary. Whenever 
possible, the FDIC would utilize information already available to it as 
the primary Federal regulator of the applicant, such as supervisory and 
examination information, rather than requiring duplicative information 
to be submitted as part of an application. Given that the applicant 
would be an FDIC-supervised institution, known to the appropriate 
region, the FDIC, at this time, has not proposed to establish any 
additional factors pursuant to section 5(c)(5) of the GENIUS Act. The 
applicant may, however, include any other materials or information that 
it would like the FDIC to consider.
    Proposed paragraph (d)(1) would require a description of the 
proposed payment stablecoin and the proposed activities of the 
subsidiary of the applicant, including related activities of the 
applicant, how the subsidiary plans to maintain the proposed payment 
stablecoin's stable value, or the reasonable expectation thereof, and 
any proposed incidental activities to the payment stablecoin activities 
or digital asset service provider activities. The FDIC would expect 
that the applicant's materials provide a description of the 
characteristics and features of the proposed payment stablecoin as well 
as the identities, roles, and responsibilities of the entities involved 
in the proposed payment stablecoin activities. The FDIC would expect 
applicants to describe what activities would be performed at the 
applicant and subsidiary levels regarding the proposed payment 
stablecoin, as well as whether any third parties would participate in 
the

[[Page 59412]]

proposed payment stablecoin activity. In addition, when describing how 
the subsidiary plans to maintain the proposed payment stablecoin's 
stable value, or the reasonable expectation thereof, the FDIC would 
expect the application to include whether there are any planned 
applicant-provided sources of strength, applicant guarantees, and/or 
intercompany agreements. Finally, the FDIC would expect a description 
of any proposed incidental activities of the applicant or the 
subsidiary to payment stablecoin activities or digital asset service 
provider activities, and those that directly support activities that a 
PPSI may undertake in accordance with section 4(a)(7)(A) of the GENIUS 
Act. The FDIC is proposing to include this information in the contents 
of the filing because understanding the proposed payment stablecoin and 
proposed activities of the subsidiary, including related activities of 
the applicant, the mechanism to maintain the proposed payment 
stablecoin's stable value or the reasonable expectation thereof, and 
any proposed incidental activities and digital asset service provider 
activities of the subsidiary are necessary to evaluate the ability of 
the subsidiary in light of its financial condition and resources to 
meet the requirements set forth under section 4 of the GENIUS Act. 
Furthermore, information on the proposed payment stablecoin and related 
activities would be necessary for the FDIC to determine whether the 
activities of the applicant would be unsafe or unsound based on the 
factors described in section 5(c), which is the sole basis for any 
denial.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 12 U.S.C. 5904(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed paragraph (d)(2) would request relevant financial 
information for the subsidiary, including planned capital and liquidity 
structure; reserve assets and composition and associated asset 
management plan; and financial projections for the first three years of 
operations. With respect to a planned capital and liquidity structure, 
the FDIC may consider any planned financial commitments from the 
applicant's or subsidiary's officers, directors, and principals or 
shareholders, or if there is a plan to launch the payment stablecoin as 
part of a consortium approach. The FDIC would expect that information 
provided on reserve assets and composition and their associated asset 
management plan to include a description of whether any reserves are 
proposed to be in tokenized form. In addition, the FDIC would expect 
that the asset management plan to contain details of how the applicant 
or subsidiary would manage the reserves, including how reserve assets 
are expected to change and what would prompt such a change in reserves. 
The FDIC would further expect the relevant financial information, 
including capital and liquidity, reserve assets and composition, and 
the associated asset management plan, to demonstrate consistency with 
forthcoming regulations that would implement the standards required by 
section 4 of the GENIUS Act. Finally, the applicant would provide 
financial projections for the first three years of the subsidiary's 
operations. Such content would generally align with the FDIC's practice 
of requesting three years of pro forma financial statements as a 
component of other applications, such as with mergers and deposit 
insurance applications for de novo institutions. The information in 
this proposed paragraph would be relevant to the FDIC's consideration 
of the factor in section 5(c)(1) of the GENIUS Act regarding the 
ability of the subsidiary, based on financial condition and resources, 
to meet the requirements set forth under section 4 of the Act.
    Proposed paragraph (d)(3) would state that an application shall 
contain a description of the subsidiary's ownership and control 
structure; organizing documents; and a list of the subsidiary's 
proposed directors, officers, and shareholders (if different from the 
applicant), including a statement as to whether any of the proposed 
directors and officers have been convicted of a felony offense 
involving insider trading, embezzlement, cybercrime, money laundering, 
financing of terrorism, or financial fraud. The FDIC could accept an 
organizational chart that includes the requisite information to show 
the subsidiary's ownership and control structure. The FDIC could accept 
proposed or draft organizing documents initially, with final versions 
to be provided when available, either prior to FDIC approval, or 
subsequently as a condition of the FDIC's approval. If a proposed 
payment stablecoin is to be backed or offered by multiple banks through 
a consortium structured as a subsidiary of an FDIC-supervised 
institution, the FDIC would expect the application to include the 
governance structure of such arrangement, including expected activities 
of the other members of the consortium. The FDIC would anticipate 
accepting and processing a single application on behalf of all other 
FDIC-supervised members of the consortium if the consortium could be 
considered a subsidiary of each. The FDIC is proposing to include this 
information in the contents of the filing because it is necessary to 
resolve the factors set forth in sections 5(c)(2) and 5(c)(3) of the 
GENIUS Act.
    Proposed paragraph (d)(4) would require submission of relevant 
policies and procedures and customer agreements, including for custody 
and safekeeping; segregating customer and reserve assets; 
recordkeeping; reconciliation and transaction processing; redemption; 
and BSA/anti-money laundering (AML)/countering the financing of 
terrorism (CFT) and economic sanctions requirements pursuant to section 
4(a)(5) of the GENIUS Act. When including relevant policies and 
procedures and customer agreements, the FDIC would expect the applicant 
to include terms of use, privacy disclosures, any public disclosures 
required under the GENIUS Act, and any disclosures required by other 
applicable laws and regulations. Policies and procedures such as those 
related to custody and safekeeping, segregating customer and reserve 
assets, recordkeeping, reconciliation, and transaction processing would 
be relevant for the FDIC to evaluate the financial condition and 
resources affecting the ability of the subsidiary to meet the 
requirements set forth under section 4 of the GENIUS Act, pursuant to 
the factor set forth in section 5(c)(1) of the GENIUS Act. Such 
information is relevant to the FDIC's evaluation, based on the 
financial condition and resources of the subsidiary, of whether it 
would be able to maintain the proposed payment stablecoin's stable 
value or reasonable expectation thereof, the ability of the subsidiary 
to meet customer redemption requests, and the accuracy of public 
disclosures of reserve assets. The FDIC would review any recordkeeping, 
reconciliation, and transaction processing policies and procedures, 
including both on- and off-chain procedures. The FDIC would expect the 
redemption policy, required by section 4(a)(1)(B) of the GENIUS Act, to 
explain the responsibilities and obligations of the applicant and the 
subsidiary, the process, conditions, and time period by which the 
payment stablecoin may be redeemed, who may redeem the payment 
stablecoin, and the circumstances under which the redemption of the 
payment stablecoin may be limited, delayed, or suspended. Additionally, 
the submission of BSA/AML/CFT and economic sanctions information would 
be necessary to evaluate whether the subsidiary would be able to comply 
with requirements under section 4 pursuant to the factor in section 
5(c)(1) of the GENIUS Act. The submission of the policies, procedures,

[[Page 59413]]

and customer agreements enumerated in proposed paragraph (d)(4) is each 
designed to allow the FDIC to evaluate the factors in section 5(c) of 
the GENIUS Act and determine whether the activities of the applicant 
would be unsafe or unsound.
    Finally, proposed paragraph (d)(5) would require inclusion of an 
engagement letter with a registered public accounting firm. This 
information is intended to demonstrate that the applicant's subsidiary 
would be able to comply with the examination of monthly reserve reports 
and certification requirements in section 4 of the GENIUS Act, which is 
necessary for the FDIC to evaluate the factors in section 5(c)(1) of 
the GENIUS Act.
5. Additional Information
    Paragraph (e) of proposed Sec.  303.252 would specify that the FDIC 
may request additional information as it deems necessary solely for its 
consideration of the factors listed in section 5(c) of the GENIUS Act. 
As described above, to the extent possible, the FDIC would use 
information available to it as the primary Federal regulator of the 
applicant rather than requesting duplicative information.
6. Processing
    Paragraph (f) of proposed Sec.  303.252 would describe application 
processing, following the requirements and timelines established by the 
GENIUS Act. Pursuant to section 5(d)(1)(B)(ii) of the GENIUS Act, the 
FDIC would notify an applicant as to whether the application is 
considered substantially complete not later than 30 days after the FDIC 
receives an application under the proposed section. At that time, if 
the application is not considered substantially complete--i.e., the 
application does not contain sufficient information for the FDIC to 
render a decision on whether the applicant satisfies the factors 
described in section 5(c) of the GENIUS Act--the FDIC shall specify the 
additional information the applicant shall provide for the application 
to be considered substantially complete. Examples of instances where 
the FDIC might not consider an application to be substantially complete 
include if it does not provide all of the items required by regulation, 
if the information provided contains significant gaps or is unclear in 
any material respect, or if the FDIC determines that there are issues 
or deficiencies in the information provided that must be resolved or 
supplied for the FDIC to be able to adequately consider the GENIUS Act 
factors. This proposed paragraph would also state that, following 
notification by the FDIC that the application is considered 
substantially complete, the applicant shall notify the FDIC if there is 
a material change in circumstances that would require the FDIC to treat 
the pending application as a new application, pursuant to section 
5(d)(1)(B)(iii) of the GENIUS Act. Such material changes may include a 
change to the applicant's financial condition, the proposed activities 
of the PPSI, or any other change that could implicate the safety or 
soundness of the applicant. The proposed rule would provide that if the 
FDIC fails to notify the applicant within 30 days after receiving an 
application, the application shall be deemed substantially complete as 
of the date it was received by the FDIC.
7. Decisions
    The GENIUS Act establishes the Federal payment stablecoin 
regulators' decision-making process regarding an application, such as 
timing, considerations, and notices. Therefore, paragraph (g) of 
proposed Sec.  303.252 would largely follow the language of the GENIUS 
Act in describing the FDIC's decision-making process. It would state 
that the FDIC shall approve or deny an application not later than 120 
days after receiving a substantially complete application under 
proposed Sec.  303.252. In accordance with section 5(d) of the GENIUS 
Act, proposed paragraph (g)(1) would provide for deemed approval, 
stating that if the FDIC does not render a decision on a substantially 
complete application within 120 days of receiving a substantially 
complete application, the application shall be deemed approved. 
Proposed paragraph (g)(2), regarding approval with conditions, would 
state that the FDIC may impose conditions upon approving an 
application, including the standard conditions defined under 12 CFR 
303.2(bb), and that such conditions shall not impose requirements in 
addition to the requirements of section 4 of the GENIUS Act. The FDIC 
generally intends for approval with conditions to include routine 
items. This may include, for example, the submission of items that were 
not included or finalized in the application, such as final organizing 
documents, or fulfillment of commitments of the applicant such as 
capital injections. Finally, proposed paragraph (g)(3) would describe 
the FDIC's denial of an application. The proposed paragraph would 
state, in accordance with the grounds for denial provided by section 
5(d)(1) of the GENIUS Act, that the FDIC shall deny a substantially 
complete application if the activities of the applicant would be unsafe 
or unsound based on the factors to be considered. In accordance with 
the response and timelines required by section 5(d)(2) of the GENIUS 
Act, the proposed paragraph would also state that the FDIC shall 
provide the applicant with written notice of the basis for denial not 
later than 30 days after the date of such denial with an explanation 
that shall include all findings made by the FDIC with respect to all 
identified material shortcomings in the application, including 
recommendations to address such shortcomings. As described above, the 
FDIC's proposed paragraph (g) largely follows and reiterates the 
provisions of the GENIUS Act regarding decisions on applications.
8. Appeal and Final Determination
    Section 5(d)(2)(C) of the GENIUS Act provides for hearing and 
appeal processes following denial of an application, which would be 
implemented by proposed paragraph (h). In accordance with the GENIUS 
Act, proposed paragraph (h)(1) would state that not later than 30 days 
after the receipt of a denial of an application under the proposed 
section, the applicant may request, in writing, a written or oral 
hearing before the FDIC. Under the proposed rule, for purposes of an 
appeal, the FDIC would treat a denial of a PPSI application as akin to 
a material supervisory determination, requiring a denied applicant to 
follow procedures similar to the process for an appeal of a material 
supervisory determination but within the timelines provided under the 
GENIUS Act. Proposed paragraph (h)(2) would provide the timing for such 
a hearing. It would state that upon receipt of a timely request for a 
written or oral hearing, the FDIC shall issue a notice of the time and 
place for the applicant to submit written materials or provide oral 
testimony and oral argument. The time for the hearing would be within 
30 days of receipt of the request for hearing, in accordance with the 
required timeline of the GENIUS Act. Proposed paragraph (h)(3) would 
state that the FDIC shall notify the applicant of its final 
determination not later than 60 days after the date of a hearing, which 
shall contain a statement of the basis for that determination, with 
specific findings. Finally, pursuant to the GENIUS Act, proposed 
paragraph (h)(4) would describe the notice provided by the FDIC if 
there is no hearing. The FDIC would provide written notice to the 
applicant who does not make a timely request for a hearing that the 
denial of the application is the final determination. Such notice would 
be

[[Page 59414]]

provided not later than 10 days after the date by which the applicant 
could have requested the hearing under proposed paragraph (h)(1). 
Conforming edits are also proposed in Sec.  303.11(f) to cross 
reference the process under proposed Sec.  303.252, which would exclude 
appeals of denials under this section from existing processes and 
procedures under existing 12 CFR parts 303 and 308 of the FDIC Rules 
and Regulations.

C. Regarding Safe Harbor for Pending Applications

    Consistent with section 5(f) of the GENIUS Act, an applicant could 
request a waiver of certain requirements of the GENIUS Act regarding a 
pending application. An applicant would be able to submit an 
application to the FDIC pursuant to proposed Sec.  330.252 upon a final 
rule becoming effective, which is anticipated to be prior to the 
effective date of the GENIUS Act. If an applicant files an application 
ahead of the effective date of the Act, pursuant to section 5(f) of the 
Act, the applicant may request a waiver from the FDIC from all or some 
of the requirements under the Act, with any granted waiver not to 
exceed 12 months from the effective date of the Act. The FDIC would 
invite an applicant to submit, together with an application, a written 
request for a waiver in writing that explains the basis for the 
request, the extent of the requirements to be waived, and the time 
period sought. The FDIC has determined not to include a provision 
regarding procedures for requesting a waiver under the GENIUS Act's 
safe harbor provision due to the temporary nature of the provision and 
the case-by-case analysis required for any waiver.

IV. Expected Effects

    As previously discussed, the FDIC is proposing to amend its 
regulations to implement application requirements and procedures for an 
FDIC-supervised institution to request approval to issue payment 
stablecoins through a subsidiary in accordance with provisions of the 
GENIUS Act. The proposed rule would establish application requirements 
and procedures to address the factors for consideration as outlined in 
12 U.S.C. 5904(c).
    To estimate the expected effects of the proposed rule, this 
analysis considered all relevant regulations applicable to FDIC-
supervised institutions, as well as information on the financial 
condition of FDIC-supervised institutions as of the quarter ending 
September 30, 2025, as the baseline to which the effects of the 
proposed rule are estimated.
    As previously discussed, the proposed rule would apply to all FDIC-
supervised institutions that seek to issue payment stablecoins through 
a subsidiary as well as engage in certain other payment stablecoin 
activities permitted by the GENIUS Act.\40\ As of the quarter ending 
September 30, 2025, there were 2,772 insured State nonmember banks and 
State savings associations.\41\ The FDIC recognizes the significant 
uncertainty regarding estimates of the number of FDIC-supervised 
institutions that would seek to issue payment stablecoins or engage in 
other permitted payment stablecoin activities through a subsidiary in 
future periods and, thereby, be directly affected by the proposed rule. 
As this is a developing market, there is uncertainty as to the number 
of FDIC-supervised institutions that might apply to issue payment 
stablecoins, either independently or through consortia and other 
partnerships. Without predicting the actual participation rate, for the 
purposes of this analysis, the FDIC assumed that 10 FDIC-supervised 
institutions would file an application each year, on average.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See 12 U.S.C. 4903(a)(7).
    \41\ FDIC Call Report Data, September 30, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FDIC estimates that in applying, FDIC-supervised institutions 
seeking approval to issue payment stablecoins and engage in certain 
other payment stablecoin activities through a subsidiary would expend 
80 labor hours to comply with the proposed application requirements. As 
stated above, the intent of the proposed rule is to minimize the 
regulatory burden for applicants by requesting only information 
necessary to evaluate the factors to be considered under section 5(c) 
of the GENIUS Act and to determine the safety and soundness of the 
proposed activities of the applicant, inclusive of the activities of 
its subsidiary. To the extent possible, the FDIC has tailored and 
streamlined the application process and would use information already 
available to it as the primary Federal regulator of the applicant 
rather than requiring duplicative information to be submitted as part 
of an application. At an estimated total compensation rate of $152.40 
per hour,\42\ the proposed rule would result in estimated application 
compliance costs of $12,192 per institution or $121,920 in aggregate 
each year, on average.\43\ The FDIC believes that the application 
requirements as proposed effectively balance the collection of 
information necessary to address the factors for consideration 
established by the GENIUS Act while containing burden on the applicant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Bureau of Labor Statistics: National Industry-Specific 
Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates: Industry: Credit 
Intermediation and Related Activities (5221 and 5223 only) (May 
2024), Employer Cost of Employee Compensation (March 2024), and 
Employment Cost Index (March 2024 and June 2025). The FDIC estimates 
the following labor allocation for entities complying with these 
requirements: Executives and Managers (11-0000): 60 percent; Lawyers 
(23-0000): 30 percent; and Clerical workers (43-0000): 10 percent.
    \43\ $152.40 per hour * 80 hours = $12,192; $152.40 per hour * 
80 hours * 10 = $121,920.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Alternatives Considered

    The FDIC is proposing to amend its regulations to implement certain 
provisions of the GENIUS Act. Because the amendments are statutorily 
mandated, the FDIC did not consider alternatives to the proposed rule.

VI. Regulatory Analysis

A. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency, 
in connection with a proposed rule, to prepare and make available for 
public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the impact of the proposed rule on small entities.\44\ 
However, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required if 
the agency certifies that the proposed rule would not, if promulgated, 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The Small Business Administration (SBA) has defined ``small 
entities'' to include banking organizations with total assets of less 
than or equal to $850 million.\45\ Generally, the FDIC considers a 
significant economic impact to be a quantified effect in excess of 5 
percent of total annual salaries and benefits or 2.5 percent of total 
noninterest expenses. The FDIC believes that effects in excess of one 
or more of these thresholds typically represent significant economic 
impacts for FDIC-insured institutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
    \45\ The SBA defines a small banking organization as having $850 
million or less in assets and determines an organization's assets by 
averaging the assets reported on its four quarterly financial 
statements for the preceding year. See 13 CFR 121.201 (as amended by 
87 FR 69118, effective December 19, 2022). Following these 
regulations, the FDIC uses an FDIC-supervised institution's 
affiliated and acquired assets, averaged over the preceding four 
quarters, to determine whether the FDIC-supervised institution is 
``small'' for the purposes of the RFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To estimate the expected effects of the proposed rule, this 
analysis considered all relevant regulations applicable to FDIC-
supervised institutions, as well as information on the financial 
condition of such FDIC-supervised institutions as of the quarter ending 
June 30, 2025.

[[Page 59415]]

    As previously discussed, the proposed rule would apply to all FDIC-
supervised institutions that seek to issue payment stablecoins through 
a subsidiary as well as engage in certain other payment stablecoin 
activities permitted by the GENIUS Act.\46\ As of the quarter ending 
June 30, 2025, there were 2,802 insured State nonmember banks and State 
savings associations. Of those institutions, 2,085 are considered 
``small'' for the purposes of RFA.\47\ The FDIC recognizes the 
considerable uncertainty regarding estimates of the number of FDIC-
supervised institutions that would seek to issue payment stablecoins or 
engage in other permitted payment stablecoin activities through a 
subsidiary in future periods and, thereby, be directly affected by the 
proposed rule. As this is a developing market, there is uncertainty as 
to the number of FDIC-supervised institutions that might apply to issue 
payment stablecoins, either independently or through consortia and 
other partnerships. Without predicting the actual participation rate, 
for the purposes of this analysis the FDIC assumed that all 10 
estimated annual applicants seeking to issue payment stablecoins 
through a subsidiary would be small, FDIC-supervised institutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See 12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(7).
    \47\ FDIC Call Report Data, June 30, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As previously discussed, the FDIC estimates that FDIC-supervised 
institutions seeking approval to issue payment stablecoins through a 
subsidiary would expend 80 labor hours to comply with the proposed 
application requirements. At an estimated total compensation rate of 
$152.40 per hour,\48\ the proposed rule would result in application 
compliance costs of $12,192 per small, FDIC-supervised institution or 
$121,920 in aggregate, on average.\49\ Estimated application costs of 
$12,192 per small, FDIC-supervised institution exceeds 5 percent of 
total annual salaries and benefits or 2.5 percent of total noninterest 
expenses for no more than three small, FDIC-supervised 
institutions.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ Bureau of Labor Statistics: National Industry-Specific 
Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates: Industry: Credit 
Intermediation and Related Activities (5221 and 5223 only) (May 
2024), Employer Cost of Employee Compensation (March 2024), and 
Employment Cost Index (March 2024 and June 2025). The FDIC estimates 
the following labor allocation for entities complying with these 
requirements: Executives and Managers (11-0000): 60 percent; Lawyers 
(23-0000): 30 percent; and Clerical workers (43-0000): 10 percent.
    \49\ $152.40 per hour * 80 hours = $12,192; $152.40 per hour * 
80 hours * 10 = $121,920.
    \50\ FDIC Call Report Data, June 30, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the foregoing, the FDIC certifies that the proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Accordingly, an initial regulatory 
flexibility analysis is not required.
    The FDIC invites comments on all aspects of the supporting 
information provided in this RFA section. The FDIC is particularly 
interested in comments on any significant effects on small entities 
that the agency has not identified.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Certain provisions of the proposed rule contain ``collections of 
information'' within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 
of 1995.\51\ In accordance with the requirements of the PRA, the FDIC 
may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to 
respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently 
valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The 
information collections contained in the proposed rule have been 
submitted to OMB for review and approval by the FDIC under section 
3507(d) of the PRA \52\ and 5 CFR 1320.11 of OMB's implementing 
regulations.\53\ The FDIC is proposing a new information collection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
    \52\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
    \53\ 5 CFR 1320.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title of information Collection: Payment stablecoin issuer 
application for FDIC-supervised institutions.
    OMB Number: 3064-NEW.
    Frequency of Response: Periodic--see table below.
    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit.
    Respondents: Insured State nonmember banks and insured State 
savings associations that seek to issue payment stablecoins through a 
subsidiary.
    Current Actions: The proposed rule would establish procedures to be 
followed by an insured State nonmember bank or State savings 
association that seeks to obtain FDIC approval to issue payment 
stablecoins through a subsidiary pursuant to the GENIUS Act.

                                     FDIC Summary of Estimated Annual Burden
                                               [OMB No. 3064-NEW]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Type of burden                      Number of     Average time
  Information Collection (IC)     (frequency of      Number of     responses per   per response    Annual burden
    (obligation to respond)         response)       respondents     respondent        (hours)         (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Application to issue         Reporting (One                10               1              80             800
 payment stablecoins 12 CFR      Time).
 303.252 (Mandatory).
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Annual Burden         ................  ..............  ..............  ..............             800
     (Hours).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: FDIC.
Note: The estimated annual IC time burden is the product, rounded to the nearest hour, of the estimated annual
  number of responses and the estimated time per response for a given IC. The estimated annual number of
  responses is the product, rounded to the nearest whole number, of the estimated annual number of respondents
  and the estimated annual number of responses per respondent. This methodology ensures the estimated annual
  burdens in the table are consistent with the values recorded in OMB's consolidated information system.

    Comments are invited on:
    (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the 
proper performance of the FDIC's functions, including whether the 
information has practical utility;
    (b) The accuracy of the estimate of the burden of the information 
collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions 
used;
    (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and
    (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on 
respondents, including through the use of automated collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology.
    All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments on 
aspects of this document that may affect reporting, recordkeeping, or 
disclosure requirements and burden estimates should be sent to the 
address listed in

[[Page 59416]]

the ADDRESSES section of this document. Written comments and 
recommendations for this information collection also should be sent 
within 60 days of publication of this document to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by 
selecting ``Currently under 60-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' 
or by using the search function.

C. Plain Language

    Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act \54\ requires the Federal 
banking agencies to use plain language in all proposed and final rules 
published after January 1, 2000. The FDIC invites your comments on how 
to make the proposed rule easier to understand. For example:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ Public Law 106-102, section 722, 113 Stat. 1338, 1471 
(1999), 12 U.S.C. 4809.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Has the FDIC organized the material to suit your needs? If 
not, how could the proposed rule be more clearly stated?
     Are the requirements in the proposed rule clearly stated? 
If not, how could the proposed rule be more clearly stated?
     Does the proposed rule contain language or jargon that is 
not clear? If so, which language requires clarification?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, 
use of headings, paragraphing) make the proposed rule easier to 
understand? If so, what changes to the format would make the proposed 
rule easier to understand?
     What else could the FDIC do to make the proposed rule 
easier to understand?

D. Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994

    Pursuant to section 302(a) of the Riegle Community Development and 
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 (RCDRIA),\55\ in determining the 
effective date and administrative compliance requirements for new 
regulations that impose additional reporting, disclosure, or other 
requirements on insured depository institutions,\56\ each Federal 
banking agency must consider, consistent with principles of safety and 
soundness and the public interest, any administrative burdens that such 
regulations would place on affected depository institutions, including 
small depository institutions, and customers of depository 
institutions, as well as the benefits of such regulations. In addition, 
section 302(b) of the RCDRIA requires new regulations and amendments to 
regulations that impose additional reporting, disclosures, or other new 
requirements on insured depository institutions generally to take 
effect on the first day of a calendar quarter that begins on or after 
the date on which the regulations are published in final form. The FDIC 
invites comments that further will inform its consideration of the 
RCDRIA.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ 12 U.S.C. 4802(a).
    \56\ For purposes of this analysis and consistent with RCDRIA, 
``insured depository institution'' refers to the definition for that 
term used in section 3 of the FDI Act.
    \57\ 12 U.S.C. 4802(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Executive Order 12866 and 14192

    Executive Order 12866, as amended, directs agencies to assess the 
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if 
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize 
net benefits. This proposed rule was drafted and reviewed in accordance 
with Executive Order 12866. Within OMB, the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) has determined that this rulemaking is a 
``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866. Accordingly, the draft rule was submitted to OIRA for review. As 
noted in other sections of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of this 
document, the FDIC has assessed the costs and benefits of this 
rulemaking and has made a reasoned determination that the benefits of 
this rulemaking justify its costs. This proposed rule, if finalized as 
proposed, is not expected to be a regulatory action under Executive 
Order 14192 because it imposes no more than de minimis costs.

VII. Request for Comment

    The FDIC invites comments on all aspects of this proposed 
rulemaking. In particular, the FDIC seeks feedback on the scope of the 
proposed rule and its requirements, and responses to the following 
specific questions:
    Question 1: Does the proposed rule adequately reflect the 
application process outlined by Congress in the GENIUS Act? How could 
the proposed rule be improved to better align with the GENIUS Act's 
application requirements?
    Question 2: The proposed rule would require applicants to submit a 
letter application. Should the FDIC consider requiring applicants to 
instead submit a structured form to be developed by the FDIC? What are 
the advantages and disadvantages of each approach?
    Question 3: Are the proposed filing content requirements 
appropriate to garner sufficient information for the FDIC to evaluate 
the factors described in section 5(c) of the GENIUS Act? Is it clear 
what information the FDIC would expect the contents of a filing to 
contain under the proposed rule? Are there additional types of 
information the FDIC should consider? Should the FDIC seek to remove 
any of the proposed types of information? If so, please explain how the 
addition or removal of such information would facilitate the FDIC's 
consideration of the factors.
    Question 4: Among the factors to be considered and listed in 
section 5(c), the FDIC may establish any other factors to be 
considered. The FDIC is not proposing to establish other factors beyond 
those listed in the GENIUS Act as indicated by the proposed rule. 
Should the FDIC consider other factors? If so, please describe the 
additional factors that the FDIC should consider and why they would be 
necessary to consider whether the activities of the applicant would 
potentially be unsafe or unsound.
    Question 5: What types of information should applicants submit to 
the FDIC to substantiate the sufficiency of their capital or liquidity 
structures? What information can best demonstrate the appropriate 
composition, custody, and valuation of the reserve assets backing the 
payment stablecoin?
    Question 6: What types of ownership or control structures of PPSIs 
may be proposed that the FDIC has not considered? Does the proposed 
rule capture the types of information the FDIC would need about such 
ownership or control structures to evaluate the factors? Why or why 
not?
    Question 7: Does the proposed rule effectively capture the types of 
policies, procedures, and customer agreements of the applicant and/or 
PPSI necessary to evaluate the factors? What information could be 
eliminated or added in the proposed rule to allow the FDIC to evaluate 
the factors while minimizing application burden?
    Question 8: The FDIC has determined not to include a provision in 
the proposed regulatory text regarding procedures for requesting a 
waiver under the GENIUS Act's safe harbor provision due to the 
temporary nature of the provision and the case-by-case analysis 
required for any waiver. Should the FDIC include regulatory text on 
this provision? Why or why not? In what circumstances might an 
applicant request a waiver of provisions of the GENIUS Act, and what 
provisions would the applicant request to be waived?
    Question 9: Does the proposed appeal process effectively protect an 
applicant's due process, minimize regulatory burden, and meet the 
requirements of the GENIUS Act? Are

[[Page 59417]]

there any other possible processes that could be used for appeals of 
denied applications?
    Question 10: Are the estimate of the number of applications 
received under this section and the potential costs of such 
applications likely to be accurate? Why or why not?
    Question 11: Would the proposed rule have any costs, benefits, or 
other effects that the FDIC has not identified?

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 303

    Administrative practice and procedure, Bank deposit insurance, 
Banks, banking, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings 
associations.

Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation proposes to amend 12 CFR part 303 as follows:

PART 303--FILING PROCEDURES

0
1. Revise the authority citation for part 303 to read as follows:

    Authority: 12 U.S.C. 378, 1464, 1813, 1815, 1817, 1818, 1819(a) 
(Seventh and Tenth), 1820, 1823, 1828, 1829, 1831a, 1831e, 1831o, 
1831p-1, 1831w, 1835a, 1843(l), 3104, 3105, 3108, 3207, 5414, 5415, 
5904, 5913, and 15 U.S.C. 1601-1607.

0
2. Amend Sec.  303.11 by revising paragraph (f)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  303.11   Decisions.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) General. Appeal procedures for a denial of a change in bank 
control (subpart E), change in senior executive officer or board of 
directors (subpart F), or denial of an application pursuant to section 
19 of the FDI Act (subpart L) are contained in 12 CFR part 308, 
subparts D, L, and M, respectively. Appeal procedures for a denial of 
an application pursuant to section 5 of the Guiding and Establishing 
National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act are contained in 
Sec.  303.252. For all other filings covered by this chapter for which 
appeal procedures are not provided by regulation or other written 
guidance, the procedures specified in paragraphs (f)(2) and (3) of this 
section shall apply. A decision to deny a request for a hearing is a 
final agency determination and is not appealable.
* * * * *
0
3. Add Sec.  303.252 to read as follows:


Sec.  303.252   Permitted payment stablecoin issuers.

    (a) Scope. This section sets forth the application requirements and 
procedures for an FDIC-insured State nonmember bank or an FDIC-insured 
State savings association to submit an application to the FDIC to issue 
payment stablecoins through a subsidiary that shall become a permitted 
payment stablecoin issuer under the Guiding and Establishing National 
Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (12 U.S.C. 5901 et seq.) (GENIUS 
Act).
    (b) Definitions. For purposes of this section:
    (1) Applicant means an insured State nonmember bank or an insured 
State savings association that seeks to issue payment stablecoins 
through a subsidiary.
    (2) Digital asset service provider has the meaning given that term 
in section 2(7) of the GENIUS Act (12 U.S.C. 5901(7)).
    (3) Payment stablecoin has the meaning given that term in section 
2(22) of the GENIUS Act (12 U.S.C. 5901(22)).
    (4) Permitted payment stablecoin issuer has the meaning given that 
term in section 2(23) of the GENIUS Act (12 U.S.C. 5901(23)).
    (5) State nonmember bank has the meaning given that term in section 
3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act) (12 U.S.C. 1813).
    (6) State savings association has the meaning given such term in 3 
of the FDI Act.
    (7) Subsidiary has the meaning given that term in section 3 of the 
FDI Act.
    (8) Substantially complete means, consistent with section 
5(d)(1)(B)(i) of the GENIUS Act (12 U.S.C. 5904(d)(1)(B)(i)), an 
application that contains sufficient information for the FDIC to render 
a decision on whether the applicant satisfies the factors described in 
section 5(c) of the GENIUS Act (12 U.S.C. 5904(c)).
    (c) Filing location. Applications under this section shall be filed 
with the appropriate FDIC region.
    (d) Contents of filing. The application shall contain the following 
information, to the extent applicable, necessary to evaluate the 
factors as set forth in section 5(c) of the GENIUS Act:
    (1) A description of the proposed payment stablecoin and proposed 
activities of the subsidiary of the applicant, including related 
activities of the applicant, how the subsidiary plans to maintain the 
proposed payment stablecoin's stable value or the reasonable 
expectation thereof, and any proposed activities incidental to payment 
stablecoin activities or digital asset service provider activities;
    (2) Relevant financial information for the subsidiary, including 
planned capital and liquidity structure; reserve assets and composition 
and associated asset management plan; and financial projections for the 
first three years of operations;
    (3) A description of the subsidiary's ownership and control 
structure; organizing documents; and a list of the subsidiary's 
proposed directors, officers, and principal shareholders (if different 
from the applicant), including a statement as to whether any of the 
proposed directors and officers have been convicted of a felony offense 
involving insider trading, embezzlement, cybercrime, money laundering, 
financing of terrorism, or financial fraud;
    (4) Relevant policies and procedures and customer agreements, 
including for custody and safekeeping; segregating customer and reserve 
assets; recordkeeping; reconciliation and transaction processing; 
redemption pursuant to section 4(a)(1)(B) of the GENIUS Act (12 U.S.C. 
5903(a)(1)(B)); and Bank Secrecy Act/anti-money laundering/countering 
the financing of terrorism and economic sanctions requirements pursuant 
to section 4(a)(5) of the GENIUS Act (12 U.S.C. 5903(a)(5)); and
    (5) An engagement letter with a registered public accounting firm.
    (e) Additional information for applications. The FDIC may request 
additional information as it deems necessary solely for its 
consideration of the factors listed in section 5(c) of the GENIUS Act.
    (f) Processing--(1) Substantially complete. The FDIC shall notify 
the applicant as to whether the application is considered substantially 
complete not later than 30 days after receiving an application under 
this section. If the application is not considered substantially 
complete, the FDIC shall specify the additional information the 
applicant shall provide in order for the application to be considered 
substantially complete. If the FDIC fails to notify the applicant 
within 30 days after receiving an application, the application shall be 
deemed substantially complete as of the date it was received by the 
FDIC.
    (2) Material change in circumstances. Following notification by the 
FDIC that the application is considered substantially complete, the 
applicant shall notify the FDIC if there is a material change in 
circumstances, such as a change in financial or other condition, that 
would require the FDIC to treat the pending application as a new 
application.
    (g) Decisions. The FDIC shall approve or deny an application not 
later than 120 days after receiving a substantially complete 
application under this section.

[[Page 59418]]

    (1) Deemed approval. If the FDIC does not render a decision on a 
substantially complete application within 120 days of receiving a 
substantially complete application, the application shall be deemed 
approved.
    (2) Approval with conditions. The FDIC may impose conditions upon 
approving an application, including the standard conditions defined 
under Sec.  303.2(bb). The FDIC shall not, by means of conditions, 
impose requirements in addition to the requirements of section 4 of the 
GENIUS Act (12 U.S.C. 5903).
    (3) Denial. The FDIC shall deny a substantially complete 
application if the activities of the applicant would be unsafe or 
unsound based on the factors described in section 5(c) of the GENIUS 
Act. The FDIC shall provide the applicant with written notice of the 
basis for denial not later than 30 days after the date of such denial, 
explaining the denial with specificity. This explanation shall include 
all findings made by the FDIC with respect to all identified material 
shortcomings in the application, including recommendations to address 
such shortcomings. Denial of an application under this section shall 
not prohibit the applicant from filing a subsequent application.
    (h) Hearing and appeal procedures; final determination--(1) Appeal 
and request for hearing. Not later than 30 days after the date of 
receipt of a denial of an application under this section, the applicant 
may request, in writing, a written or oral hearing pursuant to the 
FDIC's process for appealing material supervisory determinations.
    (2) Timing. Upon receipt of a timely request for a written or oral 
hearing, the FDIC shall issue a notice of the time and place for the 
applicant to submit written materials or provide oral testimony and 
oral argument. The time for the hearing shall be within 30 days of 
receipt of the request for hearing.
    (3) Final determination after appeal. The FDIC shall notify the 
applicant of its final determination not later than 60 days after the 
date of a hearing under paragraph (h)(2) of this section, which shall 
contain a statement of the basis for that determination, with specific 
findings.
    (4) Notice if no hearing. The FDIC shall provide a written notice 
to an applicant who does not make a timely request for a hearing under 
paragraph (h)(1) of this section that the denial of the application is 
a final determination. The FDIC shall provide the written notice not 
later than 10 days after the date by which the applicant could have 
requested a hearing under paragraph (h)(1) of this section.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

    By order of the Board of Directors.

    Dated at Washington, DC, on December 16, 2025.
Debra A. Decker,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-23510 Filed 12-18-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P