A Trump administration push to bring crypto deeper into the U.S. banking system is no longer a campaign slogan or conference talking point. It is already showing up in bank supervision, agency letters, and White House policy. Bitcoin trades around $66,684 on March 18, 2026, with a market capitalization near $1.34 trillion, while Ethereum changes hands near $2,009 with a market cap of about $242.6 billion, according to Coinbase and CoinGecko data fetched in March 2026. The policy story matters because the administration has moved from pro-crypto rhetoric to concrete changes that make it easier for regulated banks to custody digital assets, hold stablecoin reserves, and process blockchain-based payments.
The clearest evidence of the shift came from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency on March 7, 2025. In Interpretive Letter 1183, the OCC reaffirmed that national banks and federal savings associations may engage in crypto-asset custody, hold deposits that back stablecoins, and use distributed ledger technology and stablecoins for permissible payments activities. The same letter rescinded Interpretive Letter 1179, which had required a supervisory non-objection process before banks could move into those activities.
That was followed by the FDIC on March 28, 2025. The agency’s FIL-7-2025 rescinded FIL-16-2022 and stated that FDIC-supervised institutions may engage in permissible crypto-related activities without prior FDIC approval, provided they manage the risks appropriately. Acting Chairman Travis Hill said at the time that the FDIC was “turning the page” on the prior approach.
The Federal Reserve then moved on April 24, 2025, withdrawing its 2022 guidance that had expected state member banks to provide advance notification of planned or current crypto-asset activities. It also rescinded its 2023 supervisory letter on the nonobjection process for dollar-token activities. The Fed said those changes were intended to keep expectations aligned with evolving risks and to support innovation in the banking system.
Taken together, those three actions changed the operating environment for U.S. banks. They did not create a free-for-all, and they did not remove safety-and-soundness standards. What they did was remove a layer of pre-clearance that had made crypto banking politically and operationally difficult after the 2022 market failures.
The keyword points to a Trump administration official, but the policy architecture is wider than a single person. The White House has repeatedly framed digital assets as a strategic policy priority. A White House video featuring David Sacks, the administration’s AI and crypto czar, states that President Trump wanted to make the United States the “crypto capital,” language that has been echoed across administration messaging.
That political framing was reinforced by Executive Order 14178, signed on January 23, 2025, which revoked the prior administration’s digital-assets executive order and established a working group tasked with proposing a federal regulatory framework for digital assets within 180 days. Secondary summaries of the order also note that it prohibited the establishment or promotion of a central bank digital currency.
The administration then widened the crypto-policy footprint beyond banking supervision. President Trump signed an executive order in March 2025 establishing a government bitcoin reserve using already-seized bitcoin, according to the Associated Press. In July 2025, the White House also promoted the signing of the GENIUS Act, which it described as part of a strategy to cement U.S. dominance in crypto and global finance.
The banking angle matters because banks are the bridge between crypto markets and the dollar system. When the OCC says custody is permissible, when the FDIC says prior approval is no longer required, and when the Fed withdraws advance-notice expectations, the result is not theoretical. It lowers friction for banks that want to offer custody, stablecoin reserve services, tokenized payment rails, or related infrastructure inside the regulated perimeter.
The market backdrop on March 18, 2026 is constructive but not euphoric. Bitcoin is around $66,684 with a market cap of roughly $1.34 trillion, according to Coinbase pricing data fetched this week. That leaves it about 47% below its all-time high of $126,210.50 reached on October 6, 2025, based on the same source. Ethereum trades near $2,009 with a 24-hour trading volume of about $23.9 billion and a market cap of roughly $242.6 billion, according to CoinGecko.
The broader market had already gone through a leverage reset earlier in 2026. A February 18, 2026 report citing CoinGlass data said bitcoin derivatives open interest had fallen to roughly $44 billion from an October 2025 peak above $94 billion, a 55% drawdown. That matters because a friendlier banking regime is arriving after a period in which speculative excess had already been reduced.
In other words, the administration’s banking push is landing in a market that is less crowded than it was at the 2025 peak. That does not guarantee upside, but it does change the transmission channel. Easier bank participation can support custody, settlement, and stablecoin infrastructure even when spot prices are below cycle highs.
The OCC’s March 2025 action is the most operationally important. It explicitly reaffirmed three categories of permissible activity: crypto-asset custody, holding deposits that serve as reserves backing stablecoins, and using distributed ledger technology plus stablecoins to facilitate permissible payments activities.
Those are not fringe functions. Custody is the core institutional service needed for banks to hold digital assets on behalf of clients. Stablecoin reserve deposits are central to the dollar-token market, because issuers need regulated institutions to hold backing assets and cash balances. Blockchain-based payments are the piece that connects crypto rails to real-world settlement and treasury operations.
The FDIC’s March 28, 2025 guidance then removed the need for prior approval for FDIC-supervised institutions engaging in permissible crypto-related activities. That does not mean every bank will jump in. It means the default posture shifted from “ask first” to “manage the risk and proceed if permissible.”
The Federal Reserve’s April 24, 2025 withdrawal of prior notification and nonobjection expectations did the same for state member banks and dollar-token activities. The Fed said it would monitor crypto-asset activities through the normal supervisory process instead.
This is the practical meaning of “pushes crypto into U.S. banking.” The administration and bank regulators did not order banks to adopt crypto. They removed procedural barriers that had made adoption unusually difficult compared with other new financial products.
If there is one segment likely to benefit first, it is stablecoins. The OCC’s letter specifically mentions deposits that back stablecoins and the use of stablecoins in permissible payments activities. That is more important for banks than speculative token trading because it fits existing banking functions: deposits, payments, treasury management, and settlement.
The White House’s July 18, 2025 promotion of the GENIUS Act also points in the same direction. While the administration framed the law in broad geopolitical terms, the practical effect is to support a more formal legal structure around dollar-backed digital tokens.
For banks, stablecoins are lower-friction than direct balance-sheet exposure to volatile assets like bitcoin or ether. A bank can provide reserve services, payment connectivity, compliance controls, and custody infrastructure without taking directional crypto price risk. That distinction matters in a market where bitcoin remains nearly half below its October 2025 peak and ethereum remains far below prior cycle highs.
This is also why the administration’s banking push should not be read only through the lens of bitcoin price. The more durable effect may be on dollar-token plumbing rather than on spot-market speculation. The policy changes are aimed at integrating crypto functions into supervised finance, not simply lifting token prices.
The derivatives backdrop supports that reading. By February 18, 2026, bitcoin open interest had already fallen about 55% from its October 2025 peak, according to a report citing CoinGlass. A separate CoinGlass market note from March 2025 showed bitcoin funding on Binance at negative 0.0042% for one eight-hour cycle, or about negative 4.57% annualized, a sign that positioning had turned cautious rather than overheated at that time.
That does not provide a live March 18, 2026 funding print, but it does show the market had already moved away from one-way bullish leverage. The administration’s banking changes therefore arrive after a deleveraging phase, not at the peak of a speculative blowoff.
Ethereum’s spot market also reflects a more subdued environment than the 2025 highs. CoinGecko shows ETH at about $2,009 with nearly $23.9 billion in 24-hour volume. That is active trading, but not the kind of price level that suggests policy optimism has already been fully priced into the asset.
For banks considering entry, that matters. Lower leverage and lower spot prices reduce some of the headline risk that comes with launching crypto services into a frothy market. The business case becomes more about infrastructure revenue and client retention than about chasing a mania.
Policy permission is not the same as adoption. Banks still face capital rules, anti-money-laundering obligations, operational risk controls, vendor due diligence, and reputational constraints. The 2023 joint statement from the Fed, FDIC, and OCC on crypto-asset risks to banking organizations remains a reminder that regulators still expect banks to address safety and soundness, consumer protection, and legal compliance.
But the direction of travel is clear. The OCC kept its earlier interpretive letters in effect. The FDIC removed prior approval. The Fed withdrew advance notice and nonobjection requirements. The White House framed crypto as a national strategic priority.
There are already signs that firms see the opening. OCC records for January 2026 show an application by Fidelity Digital Asset Services, LLC to convert to a national bank. One application does not prove a wave, but it does show that the chartering channel is active while the regulatory stance is more permissive.
The thesis, then, is straightforward: the Trump administration has shifted crypto banking from discouraged to conditionally permitted inside the federal banking system. The most immediate beneficiaries are likely to be custody providers, stablecoin issuers, and payment firms rather than speculative traders. Bitcoin and ethereum remain the market barometers, but the deeper story is the rebuilding of crypto access through regulated banks.
What comes next is less about another headline from Washington and more about implementation. Banks now have clearer room to offer custody, support stablecoin reserves, and experiment with blockchain-based payment activity under ordinary supervision.
For markets, the key watchpoints are whether regulated institutions announce new crypto custody products, whether stablecoin reserve relationships migrate toward banks, and whether more charter applications or conversions appear in OCC records. Those are measurable signs that crypto is moving into the banking system in a durable way.
For bitcoin, the current reference point remains about $66,684 on March 18, 2026, still well below the October 6, 2025 all-time high of $126,210.50. For ethereum, the reference point is about $2,009 with a market cap near $242.6 billion. If bank adoption accelerates while leverage stays contained, that would be a stronger structural signal than a short-lived policy headline.
The Trump administration official push to bring crypto into U.S. banking is real because it is visible in primary documents, not just speeches. The OCC reopened the door to custody, stablecoin reserves, and blockchain payments on March 7, 2025. The FDIC removed prior approval on March 28, 2025. The Federal Reserve withdrew advance-notice and nonobjection expectations on April 24, 2025.
That combination does not eliminate risk, and it does not force banks to participate. It does, however, move crypto activity closer to the center of the regulated U.S. financial system. In market terms, the shift is arriving while bitcoin trades near $66,684 and ethereum near $2,009, both below prior highs and after a major derivatives reset. The policy story is therefore bigger than price: Washington has made it easier for banks to build the rails that connect crypto to the dollar system.
Q: What did the Trump administration change for crypto in U.S. banking?
A: The biggest changes came through regulators in 2025. The OCC reaffirmed that banks may provide crypto custody, hold stablecoin reserve deposits, and use blockchain and stablecoins for permissible payments on March 7, 2025. The FDIC and Federal Reserve later removed prior approval or advance-notice expectations for many crypto-related banking activities.
Q: Which Trump administration official is most associated with the crypto push?
A: David Sacks, the White House AI and crypto czar, is one of the most visible officials tied to the administration’s crypto agenda. White House materials show him publicly describing President Trump’s goal of making the United States the “crypto capital.”
Q: Does this mean U.S. banks can now hold Bitcoin and Ethereum directly?
A: The policy changes make certain crypto-related activities more clearly permissible, especially custody, stablecoin reserve services, and blockchain-based payments. They do not remove safety-and-soundness, compliance, or supervisory requirements, so bank participation still depends on each institution’s risk controls and regulator oversight.
Q: What is Bitcoin’s price while this banking shift is happening?
A: Bitcoin is around $66,684 on March 18, 2026, with a market capitalization near $1.34 trillion, according to Coinbase data fetched this week. That is still well below its all-time high of $126,210.50 reached on October 6, 2025.
Q: Why are stablecoins central to this banking story?
A: Stablecoins fit existing bank functions better than speculative token trading. The OCC specifically said banks may hold deposits that back stablecoins and may use distributed ledger technology and stablecoins for permissible payments. That makes stablecoin reserves and settlement infrastructure the most immediate banking use case.
James Morgan is a seasoned general expert with over 8 years of professional experience. James specializes in content strategy, digital media, and audience engagement, bringing deep industry knowledge and practical insights to every piece of content.With credentials including Professional Journalist Certification and Bachelor's Degree in Communications, James has established a reputation for delivering accurate, well-researched, and actionable information. James's work has been featured in leading general publications and trusted by thousands of readers seeking reliable expertise.James is committed to maintaining the highest standards of accuracy and transparency, ensuring all content is thoroughly fact-checked and based on credible sources and current industry best practices. Connect: Twitter | LinkedIn | Website
Explore SEC Chair Paul Atkins Floats ‘Safe Harbor’ Exemptions for Crypto, what it means for…
Bitcoin isn’t digital gold, says WisdomTree CEO—discover why he sees crypto winter as a rare…
Regional banks declare war on stablecoins with ZKsync-based Cari Network, reshaping US payments and digital…
Bitcoin price holds $73,500 as March FOMC looms while traders watch Jerome Powell for the…
XRP price prediction points to strong upside as Coinbase orderbook shows 9:1 buy pressure. See…
Discover why Nigel Farage is investing £215K in a Bitcoin reserves firm and what it…