MVA White Collar Defense, Investigations, and Regulatory Advice Blog

As anticipated, on August 7^th, the White House published its Executive Order designed to address the “unlawful debanking” of certain individuals and industries. The Executive Order titled Guaranteeing Fair Banking For All Americans was issued to ensure banking decisions are made on the basis of “individualized, objective, and risk-based analyses” and not as a “tool to inhibit...beliefs, affiliations, or political views.” 

John Stoker and Kate Wellman of Moore & Van Allen’s Financial Regulatory Advice & Response team co-authored the Law360 article, “Why Bank Regulators’ Proposed Leverage Tweak Matters.”

July’s “Crypto Week” yielded a landmark piece of legislation – the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (“GENIUS”) Act (referred to herein as the “GENIUS Act” or the “Act”). The Act establishes a comprehensive federal framework for the regulation of payment stablecoins and their issuers.

Moore & Van Allen (MVA) Litigation Member Tanisha Palvia and Litigation Associate Darby Festa co-authored the article, “Diversity, Equity, Indictment? Contractor Risks After Kousisis,” published by Law360. 

Effective January 1, 2026, the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TX H.B. 149, 2025) takes a unique approach to AI regulation—pulling threads from the EU AI Act, Colorado's comprehensive AI statute, and national innovation policy, while weaving in Texas-specific priorities.

Kate Wellman, Neil Bloomfield, and John Stoker of Moore & Van Allen’s Financial Regulatory Advice & Response team co-authored the Law360 article, “Key Aspects of FDIC's Resolution Planning FAQ.”

On May 1, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced that it will not prioritize enforcement or supervision of its small business lending data collection rule (the “Rule”) implementing the requirements of Section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. 

On April 8, 2025, then Acting Chairman Mark T. Uyeda of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), highlighted in remarks before the Annual Conference on Federal and State Securities Cooperation two areas where regulators may wish to reconsider the scope of federal preemption under the National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996 (“NSMIA”). Specifically, he highlighted the need to revisit the split between federal and state regulation of “mid-sized” and “large” investment advisers and the types of securities transactions that benefit from federal preemption of state registration or qualification requirements. While it is not clear that these comments will also reflect a priority for incoming SEC Chairman Paul Atkins, they raise several interesting questions and scenarios for a potential rebalancing between the SEC and state regulators, especially in light of Securities Indus. and Fin. Markets Assn. v. Ashcroft, 745 F. Supp. 3d 783 (W.D. Mo. 2024) which reiterated the limited role states play in the regulation and supervision of large investment adviser firms.

In the discussions following the presidential administration change about deregulation and paring back of post-SVB reforms, we had seen relatively little about resolution planning.  That changed on Tuesday, when Acting FDIC Chairman Travis Hill previewed during a speech at the American Bankers Association Washington Summit that the FDIC intends to issue updated FAQs in the coming days related to upcoming covered insured depository institution (CIDI) resolution plan submissions.  We are tracking these developments and how they impact the final CIDI resolution planning rule issued by the FDIC last year.

The Financial Crimes and Enforcement Network of the U.S. Treasury Department (FinCEN) on March 21, 2025 announced an interim final rule (the “Interim Rule”) which, if finalized in its current form, exempts all domestic entities from the requirement to report beneficial ownership information (“BOI”).  It further exempts foreign entities registered to do business in the United States from the obligation to report BOI of U.S. citizens who own or exercise substantial control over such foreign entities.  While public comment on the Interim Rule will be solicited before a final rule is issued, in the meantime, FinCEN has used authority granted in the Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”, 31 U.S.C. 5336) to suspend the reporting requirements for domestic reporting companies until January 1, 2026.[1] Assuming the Interim Rule becomes the final rule, the end result of this suspension coupled with the updated rule is the same: FinCEN will require no entity formed in the U.S. to file any report  under the CTA. The modified regulatory regime drastically reduces the number of entities and individuals subject to the CTA.