Stablecoin infrastructure provider Bastion says the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has granted it preliminary, conditional approval to establish a national trust bank charter. The move would bring Bastion’s existing state-licensed trust activities under federal supervision—an important development for a sector that is increasingly expected to operate like regulated financial plumbing rather than experimental software.

Under the structure described by Bastion, the proposed entity—licensed as Bastion Platforms National Trust Company—would not function like a traditional commercial bank. Instead, it would be limited to activities such as stablecoin custody and wallets, payment infrastructure, and white-label issuance, according to the company’s statement.

Key takeaways

• Bastion received preliminary conditional approval from the OCC for a national trust bank charter, adding federal oversight to its state trust licenses.
• The charter would be housed in a federally regulated entity, but it would not allow the institution to accept deposits or make loans.
• Bastion’s planned offering is centered on stablecoin custody, wallet services, payment infrastructure, and white-label issuance.
• The company has been working toward federal supervision after acquiring a New York trust charter in February 2025.

What the OCC’s conditional approval changes

According to a news release, the OCC’s approval is conditional and preliminary, meaning it is an early regulatory step rather than a final operational green light. Still, the practical significance is clear: the charter would extend federal supervision from the OCC over operations that Bastion already conducts under state licensing.

The OCC structure also clarifies the scope of what this “trust bank” model is meant to do. Bastion said the proposed institution would be unable to accept deposits or make loans—distinguishing it from conventional banks and keeping the focus on stablecoin-related services and related financial infrastructure.

A custody-first model built for stablecoin rails

Bastion’s charter plan is tightly tied to stablecoin infrastructure use cases. If approved, it would support stablecoin custody and wallet offerings, provide payment infrastructure, and enable white-label issuance through a single federally regulated entity.

Bastion frames the charter push as a response to the industry’s maturation. In the company’s statement, CEO Nassim Eddequiouaq said: “Stablecoins have moved from emerging technology into core financial infrastructure, and that requires a different standard of trust, governance and regulatory rigor.”

That perspective matters for market participants who increasingly treat stablecoins as settlement and payments infrastructure rather than niche tokens. For custodial and issuance providers, being under the OCC umbrella could also make compliance processes more standardized, potentially simplifying how clients assess regulatory posture—though the final contours will depend on how the bank charter terms are implemented and supervised.

Bastion’s path toward federal oversight

The conditional approval does not appear out of thin air. Bastion said it has been moving toward federal supervision since it acquired its New York trust charter in February 2025. By first establishing trust licensing at the state level and then seeking federal alignment, the company has followed a staged approach that mirrors how other regulated crypto infrastructure providers have sought to scale compliance readiness alongside product expansion.

Earlier reporting by Cointelegraph also placed Bastion on the radar as a steadily funded stablecoin infrastructure company. In September 2025, Cointelegraph reported that Bastion raised $14.6 million in a round led by Coinbase Ventures, with participation including Japanese tech giant Sony, the crypto-related investment arms of Samsung (through its investment subsidiary), Andreessen Horowitz, and Hashed.

While funding does not replace regulatory approval, it does help explain why companies like Bastion can pursue complex chartering processes. It also highlights how stablecoin infrastructure has become a priority for major investors, particularly those positioned to support regulated financial rails.

Broader trend: more crypto firms pursuing OCC trust charters

Bastion’s conditional approval arrives amid an ongoing wave of OCC charter activity involving crypto infrastructure firms. Cointelegraph has reported that Ripple received conditional approval for a similar charter, while Circle and BitGo have received final approval. Cointelegraph also noted applications from Kraken parent Payward, Zerohash, and Block (Jack Dorsey’s company), among others.

This matters because the trust bank charter pathway is one of the more concrete ways for stablecoin and digital-asset infrastructure providers to fit into existing U.S. banking oversight frameworks. However, the differences in approval status—conditional versus final—and in each applicant’s planned scope (such as whether deposits or loans are involved) may result in uneven timelines and uneven expectations across the industry.

For readers watching the sector, Bastion’s announcement underscores a practical reality: stablecoin infrastructure is increasingly being built around regulatory architecture, not just technology. The next key step will be whether the conditional approval progresses to full approval and how regulators define the operational boundaries of the chartered trust bank.

Investors, builders, and business partners should watch what happens after this preliminary stage: whether Bastion’s application clears final OCC requirements, how the bank charter’s scope is implemented for custody, wallets, payments, and issuance, and whether other applicants in the same pipeline receive similar milestones.

Treasury desks at major institutions are juggling three systems for the same job, said Jerald David, CEO of Lynq Network. A JPMorgan tokenized deposit for one client, a regulated stablecoin for another, a conventional correspondent account for a third. They move money on for the same reasons, but on different infrastructure.

“What clients can’t afford are separate pools of liquidity locked up on every network they access, because idle liquidity fragmented across five networks is five times the capital inefficiency of idle liquidity sitting in one place,” he said.

Unlike a stablecoin, a tokenized deposit remains a claim on the bank that issued it. It can bear interest, remain within the regulated banking system and potentially be programmed to settle against tokenized assets. The question is whether banks can deliver those benefits to consumers while maintaining privacy, compliance and control over who holds the deposit.

Interest-bearing deposits

Bhandari said Monument, unlike stablecoin issuers, holds a banking licence that allows it to pay interest on deposits and plans to offer tokenized savings accounts that earn yield.

President of the Midnight Foundation Fahmi Syed said public blockchain infrastructure presents a separate challenge: banks cannot expose clients’ transaction data and commercial relationships.

“Once you create a private blockchain, how do you then speak to another private blockchain? You then have to use a bridge or some other mechanism, and at that point, you have data leakage.” JPMorgan and Citibank have recognized this themselves, Syed said.

 Stablecoin infrastructure provider Bastion said the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) had granted it preliminary conditional approval for a US trust bank charter.

The charter adds federal supervision from the OCC to the state licenses Bastion already holds, according to a news release on Friday. Still, the proposed bank could not accept deposits or make loans, separating it from a conventional commercial bank.

Licensed as Bastion Platforms National Trust Company, it will offer stablecoin custody and wallets, payment infrastructure and white-label issuance from a single federally regulated entity.

“Stablecoins have moved from emerging technology into core financial infrastructure, and that requires a different standard of trust, governance and regulatory rigor,” said Nassim Eddequiouaq, CEO of Bastion.

The company has been building toward federal supervision since acquiring its New York trust charter in February 2025.

Cointelegraph reported in September 2025 that Bastion had raised $14.6 million in a funding round led by Coinbase Ventures, with participation by Japanese tech giant Sony, the investment subsidiary of South Korean phone maker Samsung, the crypto arm of venture capital (VC) firm Andreessen Horowitz and crypto VC firm Hashed.

 Ripple has received conditional approval for a similar charter, while Circle and BitGo have received final approval. Kraken parent Payward, crypto infrastructure provider Zerohash and payments company Block have also submitted applications, Cointelegraph has reported.

Related: Jack Dorsey’s Block seeks US trust bank charter for Bitcoin, stablecoin

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

MultiversX has opened an investigation into a potential issue on its mainnet and said it expects to provide another update within 12 hours or sooner if the team reaches a clear finding.

MultiversX has begun reviewing the mainnet issue

MultiversX said in a Sep. 19 X post that its team was examining a potential issue detected on the network’s live blockchain. The notice, published at about 10:00 a.m. UTC, described the matter as an active investigation and placed user protection at the top of the team’s response.

Keeping the disclosure narrow, the project said it was working to ensure that the network continued to operate securely and reliably. MultiversX did not classify the issue as an exploit, outage, or consensus failure, and the post did not report stolen funds, affected wallets, or a financial loss.

The team also did not tell users to pause transactions, withdraw funds, or take any other action in the initial notice. Without a technical assessment, the public statement supports only the description MultiversX used: a potential mainnet issue that remains under review.

A second update is due within 12 hours of the original notice, according to the project. MultiversX said it could publish sooner if investigators establish a clear conclusion, leaving the timing tied to either the stated window or the completion of its review.

Why the MultiversX mainnet matters to EGLD users

MultiversX operates as a layer-1 blockchain, meaning its mainnet records live transfers and smart-contract activity rather than test transactions. EGLD serves as the network’s native asset and is used for transaction fees, staking, and governance, according to the project’s wallet information.

Any confirmed fault could have different effects depending on where it sits in the network stack. A problem involving block production would differ from an issue affecting an application, wallet interface, bridge, or third-party service, but MultiversX had not assigned the incident to any of those areas in its first post.

The distinction also matters for user assets. Tokens can remain recorded onchain even when an interface has trouble displaying balances, while a consensus or block-production problem can affect the processing and finality of new transactions. MultiversX has not said which, if either, applies to the issue under investigation.

The network uses a proof-of-stake design and a sharded architecture built to divide transaction processing across parts of the chain. Validators secure the protocol, while EGLD holders can delegate tokens for staking. An incident involving validators, shard coordination, or smart-contract execution would require a different response, which is why the promised technical update will carry more weight than the initial alert.

Earlier integrations expanded MultiversX access

The investigation concerns a network that has spent years adding wallet, compliance, and application infrastructure. In July 2024, crypto.news reported that a SafePal wallet integration gave the provider’s users direct access to MultiversX through its hardware and mobile wallets, with a browser extension also planned.

At the time, SafePal served more than 13 million users across over 200 countries and supported more than 100 blockchains. The report said the integration covered EGLD access through both cold-storage hardware and a mobile interface, showing how third-party products can connect holders to the underlying mainnet.

Security and compliance tooling formed another part of that buildout. In May 2022, an AnChain.AI analytics integration added transaction monitoring intended to support fraud prevention and regulatory compliance across payments, decentralized finance, and other applications on the network, then known as Elrond.

An earlier MultiversX network explainer described EGLD as the protocol’s native coin and outlined its use of adaptive state sharding. Published in February 2022 under the former Elrond name, the report also covered the chain’s role in smart contracts and decentralized applications.

The project later adopted the MultiversX name, while EGLD remained the native token. Its functions tie the asset to network activity: users need it to pay fees, validators and delegators use it in staking, and holders use it in governance where the protocol makes that process available.

U.S. EGLD holders await technical details

For U.S. holders using self-custody wallets, the operational question is whether the investigation affects their ability to submit or settle onchain transactions. MultiversX has not announced a restriction for American users, and its first notice did not identify any country-specific impact.

Trading EGLD on a centralized platform is also separate from moving the asset on its native chain. An exchange can continue matching internal buy and sell orders while changing deposit or withdrawal access if it detects network instability, although MultiversX’s post did not identify any exchange that had taken such a step.

American users who hold EGLD through a wallet remain exposed to movements in the token’s market value even when they do not initiate an onchain transfer. Users who stake directly or through a service also depend on the network’s validator system, though the project has not reported a staking interruption or instructed delegators to alter their positions.

No SEC, CFTC, Treasury, or Justice Department action was cited in the team’s notice. The investigation is therefore an operational matter led by MultiversX unless a later disclosure identifies conduct or losses that bring in a regulator or law-enforcement agency.

EGLD trades inside a $3.99 to $4.20 range

EGLD traded near $4.12 during the reporting period, up about 1% from its previous close. Market data placed the token’s intraday low at $3.99 and its high at $4.20, a range of roughly 5.3% from bottom to top.

The available price data does not establish that the mainnet notice caused the move. In July 2024, EGLD rose 11% to $32.93 after MultiversX announced its SafePal integration, while a January 2024 selloff placed it among several tokens that fell between 17% and 18% during a period of weak market sentiment.

HotShort has joined the Feixiaohao × GWDC 2026 Innovation Forum as a co-organizer and will present its model for turning short-drama content and related revenue into blockchain-based assets at the Sep. 29 event in Seoul.

Feixiaohao said the forum will take place at AT Center in Seoul, with HotShort participating as a co-organizer. The program will focus on stock tokenization, Web3 and AI, while HotShort’s contribution will center on short-form drama rights, token issuance and blockchain-based revenue distribution.

The announcement identifies Tron founder Justin Sun and representatives from Microsoft, South Korean crypto exchange Bithumb, and Animoca Brands among the expected participants.

HotShort will explain its short-drama RWA model

HotShort describes itself as a Southeast Asia-focused platform that converts short-drama content into digital assets. According to the company description included in the announcement, its work covers mobile short dramas, real-world asset representation, token issuance, and transactions linked to onchain revenue sharing.

At the forum, HotShort co-founder Answer is scheduled to speak about how the company connects short-drama content with RWAs and distributes related revenue onchain.

Such details matter because the term RWA can cover several structures. A token may represent direct ownership of an asset, a claim against a custodian or issuer, or only economic exposure under a contract. The token itself does not establish what the buyer owns; the governing agreement, custody arrangement, and applicable law determine the holder’s rights.

Short dramas are mobile-first scripted videos built around brief episodes, making the content format different from the stocks, bonds, and funds commonly discussed in RWA markets. HotShort’s presentation is set to apply the tokenization model to entertainment content and the cash flows associated with it, according to the event announcement.

The Seoul forum will also cover stock tokenization

The Feixiaohao × GWDC program places HotShort’s content model alongside talks about stock tokenization and other Web3 uses. Although both involve blockchain records, a token linked to video revenue is not automatically comparable with a tokenized share carrying ownership in a public company.

Legal rights can differ even among products marketed with the same tokenization label. A recent ownership analysis found that tokenized stocks may take the form of direct shares, custodial claims, or synthetic contracts, leaving holders with different voting, dividend, and redemption rights.

For content-based RWAs, those terms would determine whether a token tracks a defined receivable, gives its holder a contractual share of revenue, or performs another role within the platform. They would also determine how production costs, platform fees, licensing payments, refunds, and other deductions affect the amount available for distribution.

Onchain revenue needs rights beyond a token record

Recording transfers on a blockchain can show when tokens move between wallets, but the ledger alone does not prove that income from an offchain asset reached the issuer or that a holder has a legally enforceable claim. A content-revenue model therefore depends on the agreements connecting producers, distributors, the token issuer and buyers.

Comparable questions have emerged in tokenized equity markets. As crypto.news previously reported, an SEC proposal covering blockchain-based transfer-agent records would modernize the system used to record securities ownership, but it would not by itself turn every token into a legal share or grant shareholder rights.

Coinbase has taken a more detailed route with some offshore stock tokens by linking them to underlying securities held through a special-purpose company and a regulated U.S. broker. The exchange says eligible holders can seek redemption, although its documents make those rights subject to identity, location and compliance checks. The products remain unavailable to U.S. persons and are not registered under the Securities Act, according to a Sep. 14 report.

U.S. rules would depend on how the tokens are sold

For U.S. buyers, calling an instrument an RWA does not remove it from federal securities law. The SEC’s published framework says a digital asset may qualify as an investment contract when buyers invest money in a common enterprise and reasonably expect profits based on the efforts of others. The analysis depends on the facts and how the product is offered and sold.

A token marketed as a passive claim on revenue generated by a production team, distributor, or platform could therefore raise U.S. securities questions. Any conclusion would depend on the offering documents, contractual rights, marketing statements, and operating structure.

Intellectual-property ownership would present a separate issue. A blockchain entry can record a token transaction, but copyrights, licensing authority and royalty obligations remain governed by contracts and the laws that apply to the content and its owners. U.S. purchasers would need to know whether a token conveys an ownership interest, a license, a payment claim, or only access to a platform feature.

The Sep. 29 presentation is scheduled to cover HotShort’s approach to content assetization and onchain revenue sharing, with Answer appearing as the project speaker.

Singapore-based payments firm dtcpay has closed a $25 million Series A funding round, bringing in Vertex Ventures Southeast Asia & India as the lead investor and adding further backing from SBI Group, the Japanese financial conglomerate. The round—completed after dtcpay’s initial April fundraising—also included participation from Genedant Capital and existing investor Kwee Liong Tek.

dtcpay positioned the funding as a step toward making stablecoin payments feel as routine as conventional financial rails, stating that it aims to improve how money is moved across borders. In a statement shared with the public, the company said the strategic investment reflects institutional confidence in that direction, with dtcpay’s CEO and founder Alice Liu describing the raise as intended to transform cross-border payments rather than simply maintain the current business momentum.

Key takeaways

• dtcpay completed a $25 million Series A, led by Vertex Ventures Southeast Asia & India.
• SBI Group joined the round as a strategic backer, alongside Genedant Capital and existing investor Kwee Liong Tek.
• The company’s payments stack centers on stablecoin-based transactions, building on prior launches in retail and online payment support.
• dtcpay states it offers a Visa card usable for spending via both fiat and stablecoins at 150+ million merchant locations.

Series A closes with SBI Group joining

The completion of dtcpay’s Series A adds a major financial-services heavyweight to a stablecoin-focused payments narrative that has been building over the past few years. According to dtcpay’s company announcement, Vertex Ventures Southeast Asia & India led the initial tranche of the round, and the final close now brings in SBI Group as a strategic anchor.

Vertex’s involvement matters beyond capital: as part of Vertex Holdings, a wholly owned subsidiary of Temasek Holdings, the firm has emphasized scaling technology businesses. dtcpay also highlighted additional value from investors including Genedant Capital—a Singapore-licensed fund manager that the company describes as operating with more than $2 billion in assets under management and advisory—and existing backer Kwee Liong Tek.

While dtcpay framed the round around broad operational change in cross-border payments, the investor mix signals an emphasis on bringing deeper institutional capabilities into an area where regulatory compliance and distribution partners often determine long-term viability.

A stablecoin-first payments strategy, built for everyday use

dtcpay has been working on payment products that aim to reduce friction for users and merchants—an approach that the company says its current offerings reflect. The firm previously moved through key milestones in the stablecoin payments category, including a retail and online payment system that uses both fiat and cryptocurrencies, which Cointelegraph reported in 2023.

In 2024, Cointelegraph reported that dtcpay shifted toward a stablecoin-only transaction model—phasing out support for cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin in favor of stablecoin usage. That pivot is important for understanding why this Series A may be positioned around reliability and usability: stablecoins are generally marketed as aiming for stable value, which can simplify merchant settlement and user expectations compared with more volatile crypto assets.

dtcpay also points to a product layer that goes beyond app-to-app settlement. Its Visa card enables spending in both fiat and stablecoins. The company says it can be used at more than 150 million merchant locations worldwide, tying stablecoin payments to a familiar consumer spending network.

Regulated footprint across regions

For payment companies pursuing stablecoin infrastructure, licensing and geographic permissions can be as consequential as the technology itself. dtcpay says it is licensed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore and also holds an Electronic Money Institution license in Luxembourg. The company further states it is authorized to deliver regulated payment services across the European Economic Area, with licenses and registrations in Hong Kong, Australia, the United States, and Canada.

Those details matter because stablecoin adoption often runs into uneven policy treatment across jurisdictions. Even when market interest is strong, companies must navigate compliance regimes that may differ materially from one region to the next. Earlier reporting by Cointelegraph referenced how fragmented regulations can limit stablecoin adoption in international finance—a backdrop that provides context for why dtcpay’s regulatory footprint and multi-region permissions could influence its ability to scale.

Why the new capital is likely to matter now

Funding rounds in payments tend to be judged not only on runway but on execution—whether the firm can translate licensing, merchant access, and product design into real usage. dtcpay’s messaging around the Series A suggests it wants to move from building toward broader deployment.

The company’s CEO Alice Liu said dtcpay did not raise the round to simply sustain what has already been built, adding that the objective is to change how money moves across borders. That framing aligns with the way the company has concentrated its product direction on stablecoins and a Visa-based spending experience rather than a broader basket of cryptocurrencies.

With SBI Group now participating, investors may also be expecting dtcpay to accelerate partnerships and operational scale—particularly in areas where banks, regulated payment ecosystems, and settlement rails play a central role. At the same time, markets will likely watch for clarity on how dtcpay plans to turn stablecoin rails into more consistent throughput, higher merchant adoption, and smoother user onboarding.

Next, investors and users will likely focus on whether dtcpay can broaden its stablecoin payment footprint beyond its current distribution model and how it navigates regulatory complexity across key markets—especially as stablecoin policy continues to develop unevenly worldwide.