CFTC staff updates “payment stablecoin” definition to include trust banks

The CFTC’s Market Participants Division (MPD) has reissued Staff Letter 25-40 with a targeted change that matters for how crypto collateral is treated inside regulated derivatives plumbing: the staff updated its definition of “payment stablecoin” to specify that a national trust bank can qualify as a permitted issuer for purposes of the letter’s no-action position.

The press release, issued Feb. 6, 2026, frames the change as a clarification rather than a policy U-turn. MPD said it did not intend to exclude national trust banks and moved to reissue the letter after becoming aware that some stablecoins meeting the definition could be issued by those institutions.

What changed — and why it exists in the first place

Staff Letter 25-40 (originally issued Dec. 8, 2025) is a no-action position aimed at a specific operational reality: some futures commission merchants (FCMs) accept certain non-securities digital assets—including payment stablecoins—as customer margin collateral, and some may hold certain proprietary payment stablecoins in segregated customer accounts (as residual interest) under specified conditions.

Friday’s update is narrow but practical: it expands the definition so a national trust bank is explicitly recognized as an eligible payment stablecoin issuer under the staff’s no-action framework.

CFTC Chairman Michael S. Selig also used the announcement to put the change in a broader narrative—pointing to the OCC’s national trust bank charters in President Trump’s first term and stating these banks “continue to play an important role” in the payment stablecoin ecosystem.

Why it matters for crypto

• Stablecoins as margin collateral get clearer guardrails. This is about how regulated derivatives intermediaries handle tokenized collateral—where small definitional choices can decide what’s “in scope.”
• Trust-bank-issued stablecoins now fit more cleanly into the framework. The CFTC staff is explicitly saying it didn’t mean to exclude them—and fixed it.
• It reinforces the “institutionalization” trend. When regulators talk about stablecoin issuers in terms of chartered entities and eligible collateral frameworks, that’s the market signaling it cares about who issues the token—not just what the token is called.

What to watch next

• How FCMs and clearing organizations respond in practice. The point of the no-action position is operational—watch for broader acceptance policies (or disclosures) around stablecoin collateral at the intermediary level.
• Any further staff action around related guidance. The underlying letter is part of a wider set of staff positions affecting how digital assets intersect with segregation, margin, and reporting expectations.
• Whether additional issuer categories get clarified later. This reissue happened because staff spotted an unintended exclusion—future tweaks could happen the same way.

Source: CFTC Press Release 9180-26 — “CFTC Staff Reissues Letter 25-40 Updating Payment Stablecoin Definition”