According to Cointelegraph, Payward—the parent company of cryptocurrency exchange Kraken—has filed an application with the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) for a national trust company charter. If approved, Payward National Trust Company would provide fiduciary custody and related services primarily for digital assets, marking a notable milestone in the push to embed crypto custody within federally supervised banking infrastructure. The filing comes as the OCC has already granted similar national trust charters to Coinbase, Ripple Labs, BitGo, Circle, Fidelity Digital Assets and Paxos, signaling a regulatory tendency toward formalized custody oversight for digital assets.
In its disclosure, Payward indicated that the OCC charter would build on the firm’s existing Wyoming Special Purpose Depository Institution (SPDI) framework established through Kraken Financial, as well as its Federal Reserve master account that enables access to the U.S. payment system. The national trust charter would, if approved, expand Payward’s ability to offer fiduciary custody and related services on a national scale, aligning Kraken’s custody offering with other federally regulated financial services providers.
“A national trust company provides the certainty institutions require and establishes the infrastructure to build the next generation of custody,” Kraken co-CEO Arjun Sethi said. “This is not about being first; it is about getting the framework right so markets can scale with clarity, interoperability, and long-term vision for what clients will demand as these systems mature.”
The OCC—led by Jonathan Gould, the regulator appointed under the Trump administration—approved similar charter applications for Ripple Labs, BitGo, Circle, Fidelity Digital Assets and Paxos in December. The agency’s approvals have generated scrutiny as it weighs other applications, including World Liberty Financial, a crypto-focused firm co-founded by former President Donald Trump and his sons, highlighting ongoing regulatory vigilance over the pace and direction of federally chartered crypto custody.
Payward states that the OCC application would complement its Wyoming SPDI framework and Federal Reserve account by enabling a nationwide fiduciary custody service for digital assets. The company has described the combination as strengthening the infrastructure institutions require to custody digital assets with formal supervisory oversight and interoperability within the regulated payments system.
Kraken’s broader regulatory and market-building agenda
Beyond custody, Kraken’s corporate trajectory includes strategic acquisitions and a potential public listing. Payward has recently completed deals and announced plans that would expand the firm’s footprint in the U.S. derivatives and broader crypto services markets. Kraken’s leadership has signaled a pathway toward a U.S. initial public offering, with co-CEO Sethi stating in May that the company was “about 80% ready” to go public by 2027, alongside reinforcing partnerships designed to broaden customer access to on- and off-ramp services.
From a regulatory perspective, the national trust charter question sits at the nexus of custody governance, anti-money laundering (AML) and know-your-customer (KYC) controls, and integration with traditional banking rails. A federally chartered custodian would be subject to OCC oversight, capital adequacy standards, internal control requirements, and ongoing supervisory examinations. For institutional clients—including banks, asset managers, and other custodians—the availability of a federally chartered digital-asset custodian could influence risk management frameworks, vendor due diligence, and licensing strategies across state and federal lines.
Regulatory context and implications for market structure
The OCC’s recent actions reflect a broader trend toward formalizing the custody and settlement infrastructure for digital assets within the U.S. financial system. As crypto custody transitions from purely private arrangements to regulated custodial services, institutions acquire clearer protection mechanisms, standardized compliance expectations, and more transparent risk governance. This evolution interacts with other U.S. regulators and policy discussions, including potential alignment with national standards for AML/KYC, licensing regimes for crypto businesses, and the ongoing development of a coherent cross-border regulatory regime that differentiates U.S. rules from European frameworks like MiCA.
The landscape remains nuanced. While federally chartered status can confer perimeters of regulatory certainty, it also entails intensified supervisory scrutiny, potential capital and liquidity requirements, and the need to maintain robust internal controls and cyber risk defenses. The attention directed at World Liberty Financial demonstrates that the OCC’s chartering decisions continue to draw public and congressional interest, underscoring the importance of rigorous, well-documented risk management and compliance programs for applicants and counterparties alike.
For exchanges, banks, and institutional investors, the emergence of federally chartered crypto custodians could affect counterparty selection, settlement reliability, and the interoperability of crypto services with traditional financial rails. Institutions may increasingly favor counterparties that can demonstrate formal oversight, standardized custody practices, and robust operational resilience—areas where a national trust charter would be designed to provide assurance.
In the near term, the regulatory process remains select and iterative. Applicants face not only the completion of technical and governance reviews but also the need to satisfy evolving supervisory expectations on custody protections, data security, and risk management. If Payward’s OCC application progresses to approval, Kraken would join a small but growing cadre of federally supervised custody providers, potentially shaping both product design and regulatory dialogues across the crypto sector.
Looking ahead, observers will monitor the OCC’s decision timeline, the outcome of any competing applications, and how federal custody charters influence the broader policy conversation on crypto banking, custody standards, and the integration of digital assets into mainstream financial markets. The evolution of this framework will have tangible implications for crypto firms’ licensing strategies, AML/KYC compliance programs, and the likelihood of further consolidation around well-regulated custody solutions.
Copyright 2026 Cointelegraph. This reporting aligns with ongoing regulatory and policy developments and aims to inform compliance, legal, and institutional analysis. Readers are encouraged to review official regulatory filings and statements for precise legal interpretation.
