Tag Archives: Ledina Gocaj

Cryptoasset Developments: Banking Regulators Reversing Anti-Crypto Stance

by Kevin S. Schwartz, David M. Adlerstein, and Ledina Gocaj

Photos of authors

Left to right: Kevin S. Schwartz, David M. Adlerstein, and Ledina Gocaj (photos courtesy of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz)

In a significant shift, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) recently issued an interpretive letter empowering national banks to make their own business decisions related to cryptoasset products and services. The OCC guidance, which rescinds its prior-approval requirement for national banks to engage in cryptoasset activities, comes on the heels of an announcement that the FDIC is reassessing its own supervisory approach after disclosing “pause” letters that it had previously sent to 24 banks interested in crypto-related activities. Together, these developments signal an abrupt end to the bank regulators’ arbitrarily imposed ban on banks engaging in cryptoasset-related activities, an important step forward that we had endorsed.

Continue reading

Key Takeaways from Interagency Guidance on Banks’ Risk-Management of Fintech Relationships

by Margaret E. Tahyar and Ledina Gocaj

Photos of the authors

Left to right: Margaret E. Tahyar and Ledina Gocaj (Photos courtesy of Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP)

On June 6, 2023, the Federal Reserve, FDIC and OCC (the Agencies) released final interagency guidance on banking organizations’ management of risks associated with third-party relationships.  Davis Polk’s memo on the guidance is linked here.  Our key takeaways:

Continue reading

Federal Reserve and FDIC Reports—Next Steps

Editor’s Note: The NYU School of Law Program on Corporate Compliance and Enforcement (PCCE) is watching the recent banking crisis and failures of Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, and, most recently, First Republic Bank.  PCCE is looking to publish additional posts in this area and those interested should contact joseph.facciponti@nyu.edu.

by Dana Seesel Bayersdorfer, Jung Eun Choi, Luigi L. De Ghenghi, Ledina Gocaj, Randall D. Guynn, Eric McLaughlin, Daniel E. Newman, David L. Portilla, Gabriel D. Rosenberg, and Margaret E. Tahyar

Photos of the authors

From top left to right: Dana Seesel Bayersdorfer, Jung Eun Choi, Luigi L. De Ghenghi, Ledina Gocaj, and Randall D. Guynn.
From bottom left to right: Eric McLaughlin, Daniel E. Newman, David L. Portilla, Gabriel D. Rosenberg, and Margaret E. Tahyar. (photos courtesy of Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP)

The Federal Reserve and the FDIC reports on their supervision of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank provide insight into potential upcoming shifts in regulatory and supervisory focus.

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve or Board) released the results of its review of the supervision and regulation of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), which was led by Vice Chair for Supervision Michael S. Barr (the Board Report),[1] and the FDIC released the results of its review of the supervision of Signature Bank,[2] which was led by FDIC Chief Risk Officer E. Marshall Gentry (the FDIC Report).[3]

Continue reading