MVA White Collar Defense, Investigations, and Regulatory Advice Blog

The 2026 ABA Banking Law Committee Meeting held in Washington, DC from January 15-17 delivered significant content in just over two full days of sessions. Conversations with state and federal regulators, agency general counsels, and practitioners reveal a regulatory landscape in transition. Below we summarize the following four themes from the meeting shaping the future of bank supervision, enforcement, and policy:

1. The federal banking agencies are entering 2026 with a broad and active regulatory agenda, including continued focus on tailoring and capital and additional focus on new topics such as liquidity requirements, modernization of longstanding prudential regulations, and tokenization.

1. Supervisory frameworks are shifting toward an emphasis on material financial risk, though the agencies acknowledge that implementation will be gradual due to staffing, training, and operational constraints.
2. The implications of this supervisory shift for enforcement activity remain uncertain, as the agencies continue to evaluate proposed reforms and adjust internal approaches.
3. State regulators are signaling openness to mergers, new charters, and innovative business models, while reinforcing clear guardrails—particularly in areas involving new technologies and consumer protection.

1. The Banking Agencies’ 2026 Priorities are Numerous and Wide-Ranging

Representatives from the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB), Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) indicated hot topics from 2025—including tailoring, deregulatory efforts focused on community banks, and expediting review of M&A and licensing applications—will continue to be high on their list of priorities for 2026.

The pace of change appears to be set to accelerate with the following issues becoming priority:

• BSA/AML and Sanctions: The focus will be on making the system truly risk-based and focused on outcomes rather than technical violations and voluminous reporting.
• Capital: The Basel III endgame re-proposal appears to be close to release, and a related GSIB surcharge proposal is also in the works.
• Liquidity: Efforts referenced included liquidity risk management, standardization of liquidity regulations, and exploration of potentially incorporating credit prepositioned at the discount window into the Liquidity Coverage Ratio.
• Prudential Regulations: FRB General Counsel Mark Van Der Weide said the FRB is looking to advance the overhaul of its more dated regulations—Regulations W, O, H, K, and Y, with Regulations W and O being the highest priority.
• CAMELS Reform: Representatives from all three agencies indicated progress has been made to re-focus the CAMELS framework on material financial risk and away from duplicative, subjective assessments of management.
• Confidential Supervisory Information (CSI) Reform. Reforms are expected to focus on the broad definition of CSI.
• Tokenized Deposits: FDIC Deputy to the Chairman for Policy, Alex LePore, indicated the FDIC is working on guidance to provide additional clarity on regulatory treatment of tokenized deposits.
• Resolution Planning: LePore indicated the FDIC is refocusing its efforts on obtaining the information it needs to effectively resolve large banks and hopes to propose a revised rule soon. During a lunchtime speech, OCC Comptroller Jonathan Gould advocated eliminating insured depository institution resolution plan submissions, shifting 165(d) plan submissions by large bank holding companies to a multi‑year (5–10 year) cycle, and rescinding—or putting out for public comment as a notice of proposed rulemaking—the existing 165(d) guidance.

2. Staffing is a Challenge as Supervision Seeks to Pivot to Material Financial Risks

Across agencies, representatives reiterated a common goal already set forth in notices of proposed rulemaking and supervision policies released in 2025—shifting bank supervision toward material financial risks and away from a check‑the‑box mentality focused on process, procedure, and governance.

That shift, however, will take time, with agency representatives acknowledging practical hurdles, including:

• retraining and educating a dispersed examiner workforce,
• updating voluminous exam manuals,
• developing a library of concrete examples, and
• managing through significant staffing shortages—which can be especially challenging when the shortages impact expertise in high demand areas like tech.

The shift was referenced on some panels as requiring a multi-year effort, meaning institutions may not see immediate changes on the ground.  It also led at least one representative from the OCC to express exhaustion about the amount of work they are attempting to accomplish.

3. The Impact of Material Financial Risks on Enforcement is Still Unclear

The enforcement-focused panel revealed it is too early to tell how the shift to material financial risks will impact enforcement efforts. OCC Director for Enforcement Liz Ratliff indicated the OCC is still reviewing over 30 comments to its joint proposed rule with the FDIC on Matters Requiring Attention reform. FRB Senior Associate General Counsel David Williams suggested that many of the FRB’s recent actions may have been able to be brought under the proposed new standard and noted the slowdown in actions during 2025 came during a time of transition for the agency.

Meanwhile, debanking inquiries are far from over. Ratliff indicated the OCC is still considering potential accountability measures. Practitioners on the panel noted challenges in balancing inquiries from the federal government and the states, which may be taking the opposite position, as well as demands from private litigants.

4. State Regulators Are Signaling Openness—With Guardrails

The state banking commissioner panel underscored both the depth of talent and the continued relevance of state supervision. Commissioners emphasized that their states remain “open for business,” including for mergers, de novo applications, and innovative business models.

But they paired this openness with a clear message: the tech‑industry mantra of “move fast and break things” has no place in banking. The states take their licensing and registration laws seriously—particularly in areas implicated by new technology like money transmission, mortgage origination, and crypto.

The commissioners and Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) President Brandon Milhorn also acknowledged challenges facing states, including the OCC’s strong preemption positions, which CSBS is actively monitoring, and the rise in the national trust bank charter. Meanwhile, banks are contending with rural branch closures, potential deposit competition from stablecoins, and credit union acquisition.

Conclusion: A System in Transition

If one theme unites the discussions at the meeting, it is transition—in supervisory philosophy, staffing and expertise, enforcement posture, and regulatory priorities. Based on these discussions, we expect 2026 to be as active as 2025 on the bank regulatory front, with continued evolution rather than immediate transformation.