The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today issued version 1.0 of the “Homeownership Counseling” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook.
Why this matters
The document is an OCC Comptroller's Handbook booklet that replaces a 2011 version and explains how examiners should assess existing homeownership counseling requirements under 12 USC 1701x(c)(5). That makes it guidance on applying existing rules rather than a rule or policy change.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today issued a framework for its bank examination workforce on banks' use of Super Intelligence (SI).
AI Analysis
On November 4, 2026, the OCC issued Bulletin 2026-54 and an accompanying examiner framework for evaluating national banks’ and federal savings associations’ use of Super Intelligence (SI), including generative and agentic SI. The framework is not a new enforceable bank requirement or separate risk regime, but it signals that examiners will assess SI through existing model-risk, governance, compliance, cybersecurity, operational-risk, resilience, and third-party-risk controls, with scrutiny increasing according to the consequences and autonomy of each use case.
Key dates
2026-11-04
The OCC issued Bulletin 2026-54 and the Supervisory Framework on Bank Use of Super Intelligence for examiner use.
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to inventory current and planned SI and agentic-SI use cases, including embedded functionality supplied by vendors, and map each use case to its business owner, permitted actions, autonomy level, human oversight, data sources, and potential consequences of failure or misuse.
Banks should consider documenting a risk-based classification methodology focused on potential consequences, transfer of agency, and degree of human oversight rather than technical sophistication alone.
Risk and control owners may wish to assess whether existing model-risk, governance, data-governance, privacy, cybersecurity, compliance, operational-resilience, vendor-management, testing, monitoring, documentation, auditability, and independent-challenge controls adequately address SI-enabled activities.
Higher-consequence or more autonomous use cases should be considered for stronger restrictions on permitted actions, more direct human oversight, independent validation or challenge, enhanced performance monitoring, audit trails, testing, fallback procedures, and resilience measures.
Boards and senior management may wish to clarify accountability for SI deployments without creating a separate SI risk appetite unless the bank determines that one is useful internally; the OCC framework does not require one.
Internal audit and compliance teams may wish to retain evidence showing how SI risks are identified, measured, monitored, controlled, and escalated within existing risk-management frameworks, particularly because examiners may use the framework during ordinary examinations despite its nonbinding status.
Banks should consider reviewing contracts and oversight arrangements for SI vendors, including access to data, model changes, incident notification, testing rights, service continuity, explainability or transparency, subcontracting, and termination or fallback arrangements.
Compliance teams may wish to monitor future OCC revisions and stakeholder feedback because the framework is expressly intended to be a living document.
What changed
The OCC provided examiners with a risk-based, proportionate framework covering SI used in activities including credit decisioning, payments, fraud detection, customer service, operations, risk management, and market activities. Examiners are instructed to consider the bank’s size, complexity, risk profile, and the nature, consequences, autonomy, and complexity of each SI use case; banks are not required to create a separate SI risk category or SI-specific risk appetite. The framework identifies 16 components across six pillars: purpose, risk, control, oversight, resilience, and assurance.
Compliance impact
The publication does not impose a new legally binding obligation, separate SI risk appetite, or prescriptive control standard. Its practical impact is nevertheless material for OCC-supervised banks because examiners may use it to evaluate whether existing controls remain safe, sound, risk-based, and proportionate to the consequences and autonomy of SI use; market commentary indicates that banks commonly treat such supervisory guidance as an important examination signal even when it is not legally enforceable.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today issued a supervisory framework designed to support OCC examiners in evaluating banks' use of super intelligence (SI) in normal-course business activities.
AI Analysis
On November 4, 2026, the OCC issued Bulletin 2026-54, an examiner-oriented framework for evaluating national banks’, federal savings associations’, and federal branches’ and agencies’ use of “super intelligence” and agentic systems in ordinary business activities. The framework creates no new enforceable requirements, but it signals that examination intensity will depend on the consequences, autonomy, reversibility, and human oversight of each use case rather than on the technology’s sophistication or on whether the bank maintains a separate SI risk category.
Key dates
2026-11-04
The OCC issued Bulletin 2026-54 and the accompanying supervisory framework for examiner use.
2026-10-02
Executive Order 14434 was published in the Federal Register and is cited by the OCC as the source for the “super intelligence” terminology and broader definition.
Suggested considerations
Firms should consider maintaining an inventory of SI and agentic use cases, documenting each system’s purpose, permitted actions, accessible data and systems, prohibited uses, degree of autonomy, human-oversight model, and business owner.
Compliance teams may wish to prioritize review of use cases according to potential consequences of failure or misuse, transfer of decision-making agency, reversibility, customer or market impact, data sensitivity, and the practical ability of personnel to intervene.
Banks should consider testing whether human reviewers can meaningfully understand, reject, pause, or stop system outputs and actions, rather than relying solely on nominal approval checkpoints or high-volume bulk approvals.
Risk functions may wish to map SI-enabled activities to existing model risk management, operational-risk, cybersecurity, privacy, consumer-protection, compliance, and business-continuity controls instead of creating a standalone SI risk category.
Governance teams should consider assigning accountable owners across the system lifecycle, including approval, deployment, change management, incident response, suspension, retirement, and post-incident remediation.
Banks should consider establishing monitoring capable of detecting model drift, erroneous or harmful actions, unauthorized activity, control exceptions, low-frequency high-impact events, and customer harm, with defined escalation and containment procedures.
Third-party risk teams may wish to review contracts for vendor notification of model changes and new SI functionality, incident and notification timelines, audit and testing rights, data-use restrictions, responsibility for model errors, service suspension rights, and operational-resilience obligations.
Internal audit and independent validation functions should consider whether they can reconstruct material outputs and actions, assess control effectiveness, and provide effective challenge to developers, business owners, and validation teams.
What changed
The OCC provided examiners with a framework that supplements existing model risk management, governance, technology, compliance, cybersecurity, and operational-risk practices. It covers 16 components organized around purpose, risk, control, oversight, resilience, and assurance, including permitted use and authority, criticality assessment, human-in-the-loop and human-on-the-loop controls, governance and accountability, performance monitoring, operational resilience, documentation and auditability, vendor risk, testing, and independent challenge.
Compliance impact
The publication does not create a new binding obligation or an enforceable SI-specific risk-management standard, so its direct legal impact is limited. Its supervisory significance is nevertheless material: examiners may use the framework to intensify review of high-consequence, autonomous, customer-facing, or difficult-to-reverse deployments, and weaknesses may be assessed through existing governance, model risk, operational-risk, cybersecurity, compliance, consumer-protection, and resilience frameworks.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is issuing this bulletin to clarify the process for filing applications and requesting waivers under the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (GENIUS Act).
AI Analysis
The OCC clarified how payment stablecoin issuers may submit applications and request waivers under the GENIUS Act, including a generally favorable expectation for waivers from the January 18, 2027 prior-approval requirement for existing U.S. issuers with substantially complete applications. The agency has not yet opened the application process because it is awaiting OMB approval of the related information collection, creating a timing risk that independent legal and industry commentary has characterized as a compliance cliff for issuers preparing to operate under the new framework.
Key dates
2026-10-21
The OCC issued Bulletin 2026-51 and stated that applications and waiver requests will be accepted only after OMB approves the related information collection.
2027-01-18 Deadline
The GENIUS Act and OCC final rule become effective; the Prior Approval Requirement generally applies, and unauthorized issuance of a payment stablecoin in the United States may carry criminal penalties.
2028-01-18 Deadline
The maximum statutory period for a waiver beginning on January 18, 2027 expires, subject to the terms and shorter duration of any individual waiver.
Suggested considerations
Firms should determine whether they are currently issuing a payment stablecoin in the United States and whether they fall within the OCC application pathway or another primary federal payment stablecoin regulator's pathway.
Existing issuers should consider preparing and submitting a substantially complete OCC application as soon as the agency announces that applications are accepted, rather than relying on the waiver as a substitute for authorization.
Applicants should map their submission against every prescribed application question and documentation requirement, including the business plan, management, reserve assets, issuance and redemption processes, risk management, capital and liquidity, shared services, BSA/AML, OFAC, third-party risk, enterprise risk, compliance risk, and audit functions.
Compliance teams may wish to prepare a separate written waiver request addressing the Prior Approval Requirement, identifying any additional GENIUS Act or final-rule requirements that cannot be met by January 18, 2027, and explaining the requested duration and operational rationale.
Issuers should monitor the OCC's GENIUS Act landing page and press releases for OMB approval and the opening of the application and waiver process, because the bulletin does not provide a fixed application-opening date.
Firms should maintain evidence supporting the completeness and accuracy of their applications and establish a process to respond promptly to OCC requests for missing information within the 30-day review cycles.
Prospective issuers that are not already operating in the United States should consider planning for operations to begin only after OCC approval, consistent with the agency's stated position on waiver eligibility.
Regulatory change teams should continue tracking separate FinCEN, OFAC, OCC, and other agency rulemakings concerning AML, CFT, sanctions, and customer-identification requirements rather than assuming that an OCC application or Prior Approval Requirement waiver resolves those obligations.
What changed
Beginning January 18, 2027, a person generally must be approved as a permitted payment stablecoin issuer before issuing a payment stablecoin in the United States; unauthorized issuance may carry criminal penalties. Under GENIUS Act section 5(f) and 12 CFR 15.30(g), an issuer with a substantially complete OCC application pending on January 18, 2027 may request a written waiver of the Prior Approval Requirement and other statutory or final-rule requirements that it cannot satisfy by the effective date.
Compliance impact
The impact is high for existing issuers because continued U.S. issuance after January 18, 2027 without approval or an effective waiver could violate a statutory prior-approval requirement carrying criminal penalties. The bulletin provides a potential transition path but does not create an automatic safe harbor: the application must be substantially complete, the waiver must be requested and granted, and other GENIUS Act and final-rule requirements generally remain applicable.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued today version 3.0 of the "Concentrations of Credit" booklet of the Comptroller's Handbook.
Why this matters
This is an informational bulletin transmitting version 3.0 of the Comptroller's Handbook booklet on concentrations of credit. It updates examination guidance rather than imposing new binding obligations.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) recently updated the structure and references of the OCC Cybersecurity Supervision Work Program (CSW) used by examiners. As cyberattacks evolve and as banks adopt various standardized tools and frameworks to assess cybersecurity preparedness, the OCC continues to…
Why this matters
This is an administrative update to the OCC's Cybersecurity Supervision Work Program that realigns its structure with the updated NIST Cybersecurity Framework. The bulletin explicitly states that no new procedures were added, no new regulatory expectations were established, and banks are not required to use this work...
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the Board) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the FDIC, and collectively, the agencies) are issuing a statement to provide clarity on their risk-based supervision of certain services provided by core…
Why this matters
This is a joint statement from OCC, Federal Reserve, and FDIC providing clarity on supervisory approach to third-party core service providers used by community banking organizations.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), jointly with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the National Credit Union Administration, issued answers to frequently asked questions (FAQ) related…
Why this matters
This is a multi-agency FAQ bulletin providing authoritative clarification on how banks must treat state-issued mobile driver's licenses and other verifiable digital credentials under BSA/AML CIP requirements.
On September 2, 2026, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), and the National Credit Union Administration issued a statement to clarify confidentiality…
Why this matters
This is a joint regulatory statement from OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, FinCEN, and NCUA that clarifies the scope and application of Bank Secrecy Act confidentiality requirements for SARs.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today released two revised Policies and Procedures Manuals (PPM): PPM 5310-3, "Bank Enforcement Actions and Related Matters," and PPM 5400-11, "Matters Requiring Attention."
AI Analysis
On August 27, 2026, the OCC replaced its enforcement and MRA manuals with PPM 5310-3 and PPM 5400-11, aligning OCC supervision with the OCC-FDIC final rule defining unsafe or unsound practices and establishing a risk-based MRA framework. The update raises the practical threshold for MRAs and Section 8 enforcement by emphasizing material financial risk and substantive legal violations, while allowing examiners to communicate lower-level concerns as nonbinding supervisory observations.
Key dates
2026-08-27
OCC issued revised PPM 5310-3 and PPM 5400-11; PPM 5310-3 replaces the May 25, 2023 manual, PPM 5400-11 replaces the February 27, 2026 version, and OCC Bulletin 2023-16 is rescinded.
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to map open MRAs, enforcement orders, capital directives, and supervisory findings against the new material-harm, Deposit Insurance Fund risk, and substantive-violation thresholds.
Banks should consider reviewing issue-management taxonomies and governance procedures so that MRAs, other violations, and supervisory observations are recorded and escalated according to their distinct consequences.
Board and committee reporting processes may warrant review because supervisory observations do not automatically require board presentation or a corrective-action plan, whereas MRAs and enforcement actions remain subject to formal remediation and validation expectations.
Large and complex banks should consider reassessing whether deficiencies that might previously have produced a community-bank-level supervisory response could receive faster escalation under the revised tailoring framework.
Banks with existing enforcement actions may wish to assess whether their remediation evidence demonstrates substantial compliance with the essential requirements of each order and whether remaining issues are minor and isolated.
Capital management teams may wish to review procedures for the institution of and termination of individual minimum capital ratios under the revised enforcement manual.
Legal and regulatory change teams should monitor Federal Register publication of the joint OCC-FDIC final rule and calculate the actual effective date rather than relying on the bulletin date.
Internal audit and compliance functions may wish to preserve objective factual support for responses to MRAs and other supervisory communications, particularly where the bank believes an issue does not meet the new risk-based threshold.
What changed
Revised PPM 5310-3 replaces the May 25, 2023 version and structures the OCC enforcement framework around escalation, tailoring, and focus. The OCC generally intends to provide banks an opportunity to remediate deficiencies through supervision before initiating a Section 8 enforcement action, although it retains authority to act at any time when legally supportable and warranted.
Compliance impact
The update is likely to reduce the use of MRAs and Section 8 enforcement actions for isolated policy, process, documentation, or other nonfinancial weaknesses that do not meet the new material-risk or substantive-violation standards, but it does not eliminate supervisory discretion or escalation risk.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Justice, and Federal Housing Finance Agency are rescinding the "Interagency Statement on Special…
AI Analysis
On August 25, 2026, the OCC and six other federal agencies rescinded the 2022 Interagency Statement on Special Purpose Credit Programs and OCC Bulletin 2022-3. The rescission removes that guidance as a reference point and emphasizes that special purpose credit programs must not discriminate on prohibited bases under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Regulation B, and, where applicable, the Fair Housing Act.
Key dates
2026-04-22
The CFPB published a final rule amending Regulation B provisions concerning special purpose credit programs, including new restrictions applicable to programs offered or participated in by for-profit organizations.
2026-07-21
The CFPB's Regulation B amendments became effective. For-profit special purpose credit programs offered or participated in on or after this date must comply with the amended requirements, including the prohibition on using race, color, national origin, or sex as a common eligibility criterion.
2026-08-25
The seven agencies rescinded the 2022 interagency statement and OCC Bulletin 2022-3, effective immediately. Creditors should no longer rely on those issuances or related guidance.
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to inventory special purpose credit programs, marketing, eligibility criteria, underwriting policies, written plans, and monitoring practices that were developed or supported by the 2022 interagency statement, OCC Bulletin 2022-3, or related guidance.
Firms should consider reassessing any program that uses race, color, national origin, or sex as a common eligibility criterion, particularly for credit extended on or after July 21, 2026, against 12 CFR 1002.8 as amended.
For-profit creditors may wish to confirm that each written special purpose credit program plan contains evidence of need, explains why the relevant class would not receive credit under the organization's ordinary creditworthiness standards, and supports any eligibility characteristic used by the program.
Compliance teams may wish to remove rescinded guidance from policies, procedures, training materials, legal inventories, product governance documents, and examiner-facing materials, while retaining records needed to explain prior program design and implementation.
Firms should consider reviewing program communications and applicant data practices for potential discrimination or misleading reliance on the rescinded statement, including communications suggesting that protected-class distinctions are broadly authorized.
Banks and credit unions may wish to brief fair-lending, legal, product, underwriting, marketing, and model-risk stakeholders and document the governance decision regarding whether each program should be amended, suspended, or continued under current law.
What changed
The 2022 interagency statement and OCC Bulletin 2022-3 are rescinded, effective immediately, and creditors are instructed not to rely on those issuances or related guidance. The rescission does not eliminate the statutory or regulatory framework for special purpose credit programs under ECOA and Regulation B, including 12 CFR 1002.8; rather, it clarifies that those programs remain subject to applicable fair-lending prohibitions. The agencies specifically identify the prior version of Regulation B referenced by the 2022 statement as having been amended.
Compliance impact
The rescission creates a meaningful fair-lending and product-governance risk for creditors whose special purpose credit programs relied on the withdrawn guidance, although it does not itself create a new statutory prohibition or abolish Regulation B's special purpose credit program provisions. Regulatory and litigation exposure may increase where a program uses prohibited characteristics, lacks the documentation required by amended 12 CFR 1002.8, or treats the rescinded statement as a safe harbor.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today released its annual update to the Bank Accounting Advisory Series (BAAS).
Why this matters
This is an informational news release announcing the OCC's annual update to the Bank Accounting Advisory Series. The BAAS is explicitly stated as non-binding interpretive guidance rather than rules or regulations.
The OCC has issued the 2026 edition of the Bank Accounting Advisory Series (BAAS). The BAAS contains staff responses to frequently asked questions from the banking industry and bank examiners on a variety of accounting topics and promotes consistent application of accounting standards and regulatory reporting among…
Why this matters
This is an informational bulletin announcing the 2026 edition of the Bank Accounting Advisory Series (BAAS), which the OCC explicitly states does not represent rules or regulations but rather interpretive guidance on accounting standards.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency today issued a revised compliance guide for the community bank leverage ratio (CBLR) framework as part of its ongoing work to provide regulatory relief for community banks.
Why this matters
This is a news release announcing a revised compliance guide for the Community Bank Leverage Ratio framework that became effective July 1, 2026. The update provides guidance to help community banks understand the revisions and outlines multiple regulatory relief measures (simplified capital requirements, reduced...
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (collectively, the agencies) are publishing revisions to the Community Bank Compliance Guide for the Community Bank Leverage Ratio (CBLR) framework.
AI Analysis
The OCC, Federal Reserve, and FDIC issued an updated Community Bank Compliance Guide for the Community Bank Leverage Ratio (CBLR) framework to reflect rule changes effective July 1, 2026. For community banks that use the optional CBLR election, the practical significance is a lower qualifying leverage threshold and a more flexible grace-period mechanism for temporary noncompliance.
Key dates
2026-07-01
Revisions to the CBLR framework became effective, including the lower 8% threshold and revised grace-period rules
2026-07-30
OCC Bulletin 2026-34 published the updated Community Bank Compliance Guide
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to review whether current capital planning and reporting processes reflect the revised 8% CBLR entry threshold.
Firms that use or may elect the CBLR framework may wish to reassess whether they can remain above the 7% grace-period floor during any temporary noncompliance.
Banks may wish to confirm how the four-quarter cure period and the eight-quarter cap over five years would operate in their internal capital contingency planning.
Community banking organizations may wish to reconcile the updated guide with the text of the capital rule, since the guide is only a summary and not binding legal text.
What changed
The agencies revised the non-binding compliance guide to align with the updated CBLR framework in the capital rule. The key substantive change is the minimum leverage ratio for CBLR qualification, which was lowered from greater than 9% to greater than 8%. The grace period for a bank that elects the CBLR framework but temporarily fails to meet the qualifying criteria was revised from two quarters to four quarters, provided the bank maintains a leverage ratio greater than 7% and does not exceed eight quarters in grace-period status over a five-year period.
Compliance impact
The OCC describes this as a regulatory-relief update for qualifying community banks, with the main compliance impact being easier access to the CBLR framework and more time to cure temporary breaches. The consequence of dropping to 7% or below is the need to return to the generally applicable risk-based capital standards.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued version 2.0 of the "Allowances for Credit Losses" booklet of the Comptroller's Handbook. The booklet provides information for examiners regarding allowances for credit losses under Accounting Standards Codification Topic 326, "Financial Instruments-Credit…
Why this matters
This is an informational bulletin updating the Comptroller's Handbook to reflect the now-mandatory CECL accounting standard (ASC Topic 326) and interagency policy revisions. It rescinds prior guidance and provides examiners with current supervisory expectations for credit loss allowances.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), along with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (collectively, the agencies), issued a joint statement today on the handling of highly sensitive information during examinations of supervised banks.
Why this matters
This is a policy statement issued jointly by OCC, Federal Reserve, and FDIC addressing examination procedures and data security practices for supervised banks. It establishes binding expectations around identification, minimization, and handling of highly sensitive information, plus a specific 72-hour breach...
Agencies Issue Joint Statement on Handling of Highly Sensitive Information During Bank Examinations The federal bank regulatory agencies today issued a joint statement describing enhanced security procedures for review of highly sensitive information in connection with examinations of supervised banks, such as…
Why this matters
This is a coordinated policy statement from the OCC, Federal Reserve, and FDIC describing enhanced procedures for managing highly sensitive information during bank examinations.
On July 13, 2026, following the President's Executive Order on "Restoring Integrity to America's Financial System," the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) issued guidance reminding supervised financial…
AI Analysis
The OCC, FDIC, and NCUA issued interagency guidance on July 13, 2026 reminding supervised institutions to apply existing safe-and-sound credit risk management practices when lending to borrowers who are not legally authorized to work in the United States. The guidance does not create a new lending ban, but it signals heightened supervisory focus on underwriting, account management, credit classification, allowance analysis, and consumer compliance for these borrowers.
Key dates
2026-07-13
OCC, FDIC, and NCUA issued the interagency guidance
2026-06-08
CFPB issued its Statement on Ability To Repay and Immigration Status, referenced by the guidance
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to review underwriting standards to confirm that repayment capacity, source of repayment, and overall financial condition are assessed consistently for borrowers whose work authorization is uncertain.
Firms may wish to test whether account management, credit classification, and allowance methodologies adequately capture elevated credit risk linked to employment authorization uncertainty.
Institutions may wish to review consumer compliance controls for alignment with TILA, Regulation Z, ECOA, and Regulation B when evaluating applicants affected by immigration or work-authorized status.
Risk and compliance teams may wish to update portfolio monitoring, concentration analysis, and documentation standards so that the identified credit risk factors are reflected in governance and reporting.
Community banks may wish to verify that loan policy language and examiner-facing documentation clearly show how these risks are being identified, measured, monitored, and controlled.
What changed
The publication is guidance, not a new rule or statute, and it reinforces existing expectations rather than imposing a new legal prohibition. It states that lending to individuals not legally authorized to work in the United States may present elevated credit risk because their ability to generate income, maintain employment, and remain financially stable may be more uncertain.
Compliance impact
The practical impact is moderate to significant for consumer and retail lending programs because the agencies are signaling that work-authorization uncertainty is a relevant credit-risk factor and a consumer-compliance consideration. The publication could increase supervisory scrutiny of underwriting rationale, documentation quality, and treatment of affected borrowers, especially where institutions cannot show that these risks are consistently incorporated into controls.
The OCC is highlighting the updated Section 314(b) Fact Sheet recently issued by the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). The updated guidance clarifies how financial institutions can share information with each other about suspected fraud under section 314(b) of the USA…
AI Analysis
The OCC issued Bulletin 2026-30 on 2026-07-09 to highlight FinCEN’s updated Section 314(b) Fact Sheet on voluntary information sharing. The update matters because it broadens and clarifies what participating financial institutions can share to detect suspected fraud and other illicit financial activity, while operating under the Section 314(b) safe harbor.
Compliance teams may wish to review whether current Section 314(b) registration status is current and whether the institution has designated internal points of contact for information-sharing requests.
Firms may wish to assess whether existing BSA/AML and fraud-monitoring procedures explicitly cover the newly highlighted examples of shareable information, including cyber-related data and video surveillance footage.
Institutions may wish to confirm that information-sharing protocols limit disclosures to permissible Section 314(b) purposes and maintain security and confidentiality controls over information received from peers.
Banks may wish to refresh training for BSA, fraud, and investigations staff on when sharing is permissible, including the safe-harbor conditions and the scope of eligible counterparties.
Compliance teams may wish to verify that procedures for responding to requests and documenting reliance on Section 314(b) remain aligned with FinCEN’s updated fact sheet.
What changed
FinCEN’s updated Section 314(b) Fact Sheet clarifies that a participating financial institution may share information about suspected fraud, money laundering, terrorist financing, or other specified unlawful activities with any other financial institution eligible to participate in the Section 314(b) program.
Compliance impact
This is a supervisory guidance update rather than a new binding rule, but it has practical significance because it signals how regulators expect voluntary information sharing to support fraud and BSA/AML controls. The OCC emphasizes the safe harbor for eligible participants, so institutions that do not adapt their procedures may miss an opportunity to improve detection of money laundering, terrorist financing, and fraud.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency today issued the "Lending and Loan Portfolio Risk Management" booklet of the Comptroller's Handbook.
Why this matters
The OCC Bulletin 2026-29 announces the issuance of a revised 'Lending and Loan Portfolio Risk Management' booklet that rescissions and combines multiple prior guidance documents.