Ray Grace, the commissioner of banks for North Carolina, has said that banks should explore the possibility of creating reciprocal arrangements in which a fintech license in one state could be automatically transferred to another state.

A week after the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency created a new federal charter for fintech firms, California's financial regulator is calling on other states to work together in making their licensing system more palatable to companies.

State regulators have been bracing for the OCC's move, fearing a federal system could give fintech firms inappropriate advantages.

Still, some have acknowledged that they could make their own system easier by creating a more unified system for companies that have to apply for a license in every single state in which they want to operate.

"There is a recognition that state regulators could probably do a better job of providing a more coordinated regime," Tom Dresslar, the deputy commissioner for policy and planning in California's Department of Business Oversight, said in an interview. "There have been some preliminary discussions about how we would go about doing that."

Dresslar is not alone. In an interview in September, Ray Grace, the commissioner of banks for North Carolina, said that banks should explore the possibility of creating reciprocal arrangements in which a license in one state could be automatically transferred to another state.

"It's a path that we need to explore," Grace said. "Ideally, if we could work out the issues [to] give each of the participating states comfort in the manner in which the companies will be chartered and supervised, that will perhaps allow for some reciprocal participation in the examination of those companies."

The OCC announced last week that it would allow fintech companies to apply for a limited-purpose national bank charter, which would provide firms with an alternative to the complex state-by-state licensing system.

But states quickly registered their strong opposition to the OCC's plan, arguing that by pre-empting certain state laws it could lower consumer protection standards for companies that are admitted to the program.

"We are deeply concerned that the OCC plan could end up being back to the future darkly for consumers," Dresslar said.

He added that if the charter pre-empts state consumer protection laws, "We will oppose the charter."

Dresslar said the California regulator would comment on the OCC's proposal as a first step, but he declined to specify what other types of formal actions it might take.

"We haven't formalized a plan, but we'll send in comments, and engage in whatever other activities we feel are warranted," he said.

When the charter was announced, state regulators joined consumer protection advocates in expressing skepticism about the OCC's ability to ensure that chartered companies would not engage in predatory or unfair lending behavior.

"The problem is that federal banking regulators have never had much stomach for enforcing consumer protection laws," Dresslar said. "But they have demonstrated a willingness to pre-empt our enforcement authority. That combination has always put consumers on the losing end, and we don't want to repeat history."

Other banking regulators had their own choice words on the OCC's charter.

"The New York State Department of Financial Services opposes any effort to federalize what states have been doing — and doing well — for over a century," New York Superintendent of Financial Services Maria T. Vullo said in a statement last week.

Subscribe Now

Access to a full range of industry content, analysis and expert commentary.

30-Day Free Trial

No credit card required. Access coverage of the securitization marketplace, including breaking news updated throughout the day.