Is Circle Becoming a Bank? CSO Slams Rumors, Demands Stablecoin Law

Circle has denied reports that it plans to become a bank. The company’s Chief Strategy Officer, Dante Disparte, clarified in a statement posted on April 24 that it does not intend to seek status as an insured depository institution.

@circle does not intend to become a bank or any other kind of an insured depository institution. We do intend to comply with a future U.S. regulatory framework for payment stablecoins, which may require registering for a federal or state trust charter or other nonbank license. We…

— Dante Disparte (@ddisparte) April 25, 2025

According to Dante, the company said it will comply with expected legislation on payment stablecoins, which may require holding a federal or state trust charter or another form of nonbank license.

Circle Clarifies Stance Amid Speculation on Bank Licensing

“We do intend to comply with a future U.S. regulatory framework for payment stablecoins, which may require registering for a federal or state trust charter or other nonbank license,” said Dante.

“We urge Congress to pass bipartisan payment stablecoin legislation now to champion American innovation, stability, and consumer safety,” he added.

A report on April 21 placed Circle among several crypto firms said to be exploring bank charters, citing unnamed sources familiar with the matter.

Alongside BitGo, companies such as Paxos and Coinbase were described as considering various forms of licensure—including trust charters and industrial bank models—to bring their stablecoin and custody businesses under formal regulatory oversight.

The article linked these discussions to potential legislation moving through Congress that would require stablecoin issuers to hold either a federal or state charter.

That framework, backed by members of both parties, is designed to bring oversight to the growing market for dollar-backed tokens used in digital payments and settlement.

Stablecoin Rules in the U.S. Still Undefined

Circle, which issues the USDC stablecoin, has been central to policy debates around digital dollar assets.

As one of the two largest stablecoin issuers globally, the company is often referenced in regulatory contexts—even when it has not made formal moves in line with the speculation.

The U.S. still lacks a unified legal framework for stablecoins, leaving oversight split across agencies.

While Congress debates new rules, firms like Circle are navigating patchwork requirements that mirror banking without the benefits or obligations of becoming a bank.

Other markets have moved faster. Europe’s MiCA and Japan’s stablecoin laws provide clearer paths for issuers. Without similar clarity in the U.S., regulatory ambiguity continues to shape how—and where—stablecoin companies operate.