View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

3/2/2023

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions
Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.
February 15, 2023

As Prepared for Delivery
Good a ernoon. Itʼs a pleasure to be here today, to join this esteemed group and to see so
many familiar faces. Iʼm particularly thankful to Margaret and Bridget for the invitation.
Iʼm honored to join a distinguished list of current and former Treasury o icials who have
spoken at the Club, including Treasury Under Secretary Gary Gensler in 2000 and Treasury
Assistant Secretary Michael Barr in 2009.
Because new payment and investment technologies are rapidly changing the way consumers
and investors interact with financial products and payments, today I will be discussing
Treasuryʼs financial institutions agenda with a focus on our recent work on fintech and Big
Tech, crypto-assets, and cloud service providers.

NON-B ANKS/F INT ECH
Iʼd like to start with the Departmentʼs work regarding non-bank firms involved in financial
services, including fintech and Big Tech firms.
Participation by non-bank firms in financial services is a key priority area for Treasury right
now. In November, we published a report assessing the impacts of new entrant non-bank firms
on competition in consumer finance markets, in response to President Bidenʼs Executive Order
on Promoting Competition in the American Economy.[1] We found, unsurprisingly, that the
banking industry has grown more concentrated over time. There are opportunities for market
participants to improve the accessibility and delivery of financial services.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

1/11

3/2/2023

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

New entrants are taking advantage of this opportunity by diversifying and adding competitive
pressure to consumer finance markets. However, new entrant non-bank firms have largely not
been subject to the kind of comprehensive regulation and supervision to which banks are
subject. As a result, the growing role of these firms in financial markets – and the benefits
they could provide – are accompanied by numerous risks, including risks related to regulatory
arbitrage, data privacy and security, bias and discrimination, and consumer protection, among
others.
Treasuryʼs report makes several recommendations, primarily focused on the use of existing
authorities by the federal banking regulators and the CFPB to achieve better-coordinated
supervision of bank-fintech partnerships and banksʼ risk management of new credit
underwriting models. The report also supports federal agenciesʼ ongoing e orts, including the
review of bank merger policies by federal banking regulators and the Justice Department;
increased antitrust scrutiny of the tech and financial services sectors by competition
authorities; the CFPBʼs inquiry into Big Tech payment platforms and Buy Now, Pay Later
(BNPL) providers; and the CFPBʼs rulemaking e orts to address consumer financial data
access through implementation of section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act.
Consistent with the Presidentʼs Executive Order on fostering competition, the report also
examines concerns related to the entrance by Big Tech into financial services. Big Tech firms
have generally sought to enter consumer finance markets through relationships with banks
and third-party fintech firms. By not directly o ering banking services, BigTech firms have
avoided the prudential regulation and supervision that would apply if they sought to o er
those services directly.
This presents a trade-o . On the one hand, new entrants and new partnerships may be able to
contribute to a more competitive, innovative, and inclusive financial services landscape.
But on the other hand, as firms expand their e orts to embed finance into e-commerce
platforms, several concerns arise. With non-banks providing bank-like services, but without the
safety and soundness, consumer protection, and risk management that prudential regulation
and supervision provide, there may be risks to individual users or to the financial system more
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

2/11

3/2/2023

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

broadly. Further, these firmsʼ potential to scale rapidly, due to network e ects and strategic
complementarities, could result in increased market concentration. The structure of our retail
payment systems o ers some benefits by providing customers with choices, and if one
system is unavailable, other failover options are available. Reducing these redundancies and
increasing concentration could be worse for customers and for the financial system.
There are also risks analogous to the age-old concerns regarding the mixing of banking and
commerce. Reasons for the historical separation in the United States of banking and
commerce include preventing conflicts of interest, avoiding excessive concentration of
economic power, and limiting contagion between a iliates – where the failure of a commercial
platform leads to impairment of the safety and soundness of the a iliated bank. Big Techʼs
involvement in financial services presents many of these historical issues, in addition to novel
banking and commerce concerns. For example, Big Tech firms may have incentives to leverage
their existing commercial relationships, consumer data, and other resources to enter new
markets, expand their networks and o erings, and scale rapidly to achieve capabilities that
others—including depository institutions—do not have and cannot replicate. They may be
able to use data advantages, network e ects, acquisitions, predatory pricing, and other
tactics to gain or entrench their market power to the detriment of competition and,
ultimately, consumers.
While many of these issues are still emerging, we are watching them closely and engaging
with our partners across the Administration and at the regulatory agencies.

CRYPTO ASSETS
Iʼll now turn to a more specific financial technology sector, and Treasuryʼs work on cryptoassets. Treasury is working to promote a fairer, more inclusive, and more e icient financial
system; to mitigate risks to financial stability; to protect consumers, investors, and
businesses; and to prevent risks to national security, including from illicit finance. To achieve
these goals, we work to understand the opportunities and risks of these financial products,
and how they can impact all Americans.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

3/11

3/2/2023

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

As many of you know, Treasury and interagency groups we work with have published several
reports regarding digital assets. Iʼll touch on some key themes from those reports.
First, in late 2021, the Presidentʼs Working Group on Financial Markets (PWG), along with the
FDIC and OCC, published a report on stablecoins used for payments.[2] Stablecoins have the
potential to scale rapidly, in part due to network e ects and strategic complementarities. Due
to the role stablecoins could potentially play as a replacement for other more traditional
forms of payment, they raise concerns related to detrimental e ects on competition;
excessive concentration of economic power; and systemic risk.
Recent events have again demonstrated the inadequate oversight of stablecoins. Many
stablecoins involve private guarantee arrangements that are a hallmark of shadow banking.[3]
The experience last year with the stablecoin Terra shows how investors are harmed from runs
on nominally stable assets. As we saw, the run on Terra began with a series of large
withdrawals.[4] To meet withdrawals, an issuer may have to sell assets quickly, leading to a
fire sale dynamic that diminishes the value for remaining investors. Past examples have shown
us that early redeemers, which tend to be experienced investors with the most advanced
technological access to sell quickly, use their first mover advantage to redeem at the first
sign of issues, leaving less-experienced retail investors to bear the brunt of the losses.[5]
The PWG made recommendations to address these and other risks. The reportʼs main
recommendation is for Congress to enact legislation to ensure that stablecoin issuers are
subject to a robust prudential regulatory framework, in contrast to the light-touch regimes
that we have seen emerge. Among other things, such a framework would mitigate risks to
financial stability and reinforce the separation of banking and commerce by limiting the ability
of commercial companies to issue stablecoins.
More recently, in the fall of 2022, Treasury published a series of reports in response to
President Bidenʼs Executive Order on Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets.[6]
The Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), which the Secretary of the Treasury chairs,
published a report in October 2022 that examined the potential financial stability implications
of crypto-asset activities.[7] The FSOC report noted that while crypto-asset activities have not
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

4/11

3/2/2023

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

yet achieved the scale or interconnectedness to pose financial stability risks, they could
eventually pose such risks if they are not subject to appropriate regulation and enforcement.
The report noted many risks associated with crypto markets, including volatility, leverage,
opacity, vertical integration, operational risk, inadequate governance, and noncompliance with
applicable regulatory regimes. Many of these issues have come to light during recent market
events and bankruptcies. The FSOC report also made recommendations to address key
financial stability risks of crypto-assets.
Taken together, these reports highlight several gaps in existing authorities over cryptoassets. These include, notably:
The vulnerability of unregulated stablecoins;
The limited authority over spot markets for crypto-assets that are not securities; and
The need for greater visibility into the activities of all of the a iliates and subsidiaries of
integrated crypto entities.
Elsewhere, we have noted the need for a more comprehensive payments regulatory
framework.[8] One can imagine scenarios in which the confluence of these gaps becomes
particularly troubling—for example, where a large and lightly regulated payment company
elects to issue its own lightly regulated stablecoin.
In September 2022, Treasury issued a report titled Crypto-Assets: Implications for Consumers,
Investors, and Businesses.[9] The report reviews crypto-asset markets and the risks and
opportunities they might present to U.S. consumers, investors, and businesses. We noted
that consumers, investors, and businesses are exposed to conduct, operational, and
intermediation risks, and risks from regulatory non-compliance. These factors contribute to
frequent instances of operational failures, market manipulation, fraud, the s, and scams.
There are also unique risks associated with these o erings, such as data privacy and security
risks, cost structure concerns, and other risks related to new forms of discrimination and
unfair and deceptive acts and practices.
In particular, we noted in the report that some companies market their products as safe and
deposit-like when they are nothing of the sort. The FDIC and CFPB have taken action against
false and misleading statements regarding the availability of deposit insurance, but
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

5/11

3/2/2023

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

widespread confusion remains. Moreover, as seen in recent bankruptcies, crypto firms may be
engaged in exceptionally risky behavior, and holders of crypto-assets may not understand the
potential for the loss of their investments.

We also focused on the claims that crypto-assets can advance financial inclusion. While there
is limited data on the crypto-asset use and experience of populations vulnerable to disparate
impacts, available evidence suggests that the potential financial inclusion benefits of cryptoassets largely have yet to materialize, due to factors including extreme price volatility, the
need for access to an account with a depository institution, and high transaction fees.
Further, crypto-asset products may present increased risks to populations vulnerable to
disparate impacts, including creating new forms of fraud and scams, predatory inclusion, and
surveillance and data gathering. In short, while some have argued that digital assets could
improve access to financial services for financially underserved communities, that vision has
not materialized. In fact, at this point, it would appear that for some investors participation in
crypto-assets could contribute to exacerbating existing inequities.[10]
A consistent theme across the three reports that I have mentioned is that the United States
has strong investor and consumer protection laws that address many of the risks posed by
digital assets. Where existing laws and regulations apply, they must be enforced vigorously so
that crypto-assets and services are subject to the same protections and principles as other
financial products and services. There is an urgent need for action to protect consumers,
investors, and businesses, even as stakeholders and policymakers formulate legislative
proposals for comprehensive regulation of crypto-assets.
While consumers and investors have su ered meaningful and unnecessary harms during the
crypto-asset market volatility, so far crypto-assets have not undermined U.S. financial
stability more broadly. That is due in large part to the federal banking agencies taking a
careful and cautious approach.
We have certainly observed some connections between banks and crypto-asset firms that
raise concerns. For example, Alameda Research Ventures LLC, an a iliate of FTX, made a
substantial investment in a very small community bank that resulted in the bankʼs assets
growing five-fold, with funds from Alameda and its related entities accounting for a
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

6/11

3/2/2023

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

significant percentage of the bankʼs deposits.[11] In addition, a recent FDIC report indicates
certain crypto-asset firms are placing runnable deposits at banks under more permissive
terms than had previously been permitted.[12]
To limit the regulated banking systemʼs exposure to unregulated crypto-assets, the banking
agencies recently issued a joint statement regarding the risks of crypto-asset activities and
banksʼ obligations to ensure that such activities are conducted in a safe and sound manner
and consistent with prohibitions against unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices.[13] In
addition to reinforcing these foundational banking principles, the agencies also noted that
issuing or holding as principal crypto assets that are issued, stored, or transferred on an open,
public, or decentralized network is highly likely to be to be inconsistent with safe and sound
banking and warned against concentrated exposures to the crypto-asset sector.
These concerns are not about whether investors are allowed to participate in crypto-markets
– it is a question of how we maintain the safety and soundness of banking institutions in the
context of certain extremely volatile financial products. In my view, the agenciesʼ statement is
a timely and well-founded response to the recent events in the crypto-asset markets.

CLOUD ADOPT ION REPORT
Finally, Iʼd like to highlight our cybersecurity work related to cloud adoption in the financial
services sector.
Cybersecurity is a significant focus for the entire federal government and is a particular
priority of mine, as I oversee Treasuryʼs O ice of Cybersecurity and Critical Infrastructure
Protection and am chair of the Financial Banking and Information Infrastructure Committee
(FBIIC). The FBIIC, whose members represent the state and federal financial regulatory
agencies, is our primary mechanism for disseminating cybersecurity information to the U.S.
regulatory community.
As part of the FBIICʼs ongoing review of cybersecurity trends and issues in the financial sector,
Treasury, in collaboration with FBIIC members, released a report on February 8th that
examines how the current and future use of cloud services across the financial sector may
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

7/11

3/2/2023

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

impact the sectorʼs operational resilience.[14]
As the report acknowledges, there can be significant advantages of cloud services, including
reduced costs; the ability to rapidly deploy new forms of information technology; a shorter
time to develop new products and services; and enhanced capabilities for security and
resilience.
Our report also describes gaps reported by many of the firms interviewed by Treasury.
Specifically, the report highlights some of the key challenges of increased cloud adoption. Let
me note three of these concerns. One is insu icient transparency to customers pertaining to
operations and operational incidents at cloud service providers (CSPs). A second is unequal
dynamics in cloud contract negotiations, which can particularly a ect smaller firms. The third
is the potential impacts that market concentration among CSPs could have on exposures to
operational risk and general sector-wide resilience.
Treasury is committed to enabling the financial services sector to realize the potential
benefits of cloud services in a safe, secure, and responsible way. To that end, over the course
of 2023 and 2024, Treasury will work with the FBIIC, FSOC, CSPs, and the financial sector to
attempt to resolve the gaps identified in the report through a newly established Cloud
Services Steering Group. The steering group will coordinate on issues raised in the report and
promote coordination more broadly, including with respect to federal agenciesʼ examinations
and information sharing, while working with the private sector to bolster transparency at
CSPs.
Similar to the findings in Treasuryʼs non-bank competition report, we are particularly focused
on the ability to monitor financial institutionsʼ third-party relationships and the concentration
of segments of the cloud services market among three CSPs.

CONCLUSION
To return to todayʼs themes, significant potential exists to harness the underlying technology
in fintech, digital assets, and cloud services adoption. However, there remain common risks,
from inadequate oversight to excessive concentration to consumer harms. In each of these
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

8/11

3/2/2023

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

three areas, Treasury is actively engaged, including by coordinating with the o icial sector
and other stakeholders to ensure we achieve outcomes that benefit all Americans and our
economic values of fairness, growth, and competitiveness.
In addition to ensuring that policy is technology-neutral, we must also remember that
technology itself is neutral in many respects. Ultimately, human beings are responsible for
designing the information that goes in, the ways that information is processed, and how the
resulting output is used. As Secretary Yellen has said, “just as much as we need responsible
innovation, we also need equitable innovation.”[15]
While we are monitoring emerging issues, the Administration is focused on maintaining the
foundation of a stable and equitable financial system. In addition to addressing the risks
presented by crypto-assets, we must remember that there are also issues in traditional
finance that cause many Americans to distrust existing institutions and increase the appeal of
misleading claims made by predatory actors. That is why the CFPB is taking steps to limit
consumer credit card fees, potentially protecting Americans from billions of dollars per year in
unfair costs.[16] The banking agencies are working towards issuing a proposal to implement
enhancements to the Basel international capital rules, in order to ensure that our banking
system remains resilient in the face of potential shocks.[17] And Treasury is making historic
investments in CDFIs and minority depository institutions to support economic development
in underserved communities and communities of color.[18] While some are pushing back on
these e orts, and proposing deregulation as the alternative path, we have seen time and time
again that strong regulation and consumer protection are vital to ensure that our financial
system is a source of stability and equitable growth.
Thank you again for having me. I look forward to further engaging with you all on these and
other topics.

[1]

See U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF NEW ENTRANT NON-BANK FIRMS ON COMPETITION IN CONSUMER FINANCE

MARKETS (Nov. 2022), https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Assessing-the-Impact-of-New-Entrant-Nonbank-Firms.pdf

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

.

9/11

3/2/2023

[2]

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

See PRESIDENT’S WORKING GROUP ON FINANCIAL MARKETS, THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, AND THE OFFICE OF THE

COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY, REPORT ON STABLECOINS (NOV. 2021),
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/StableCoinReport_Nov1_508.pdf
[3]

.

See DANIEL K. TARULLO, GOVERNOR, BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, SHADOW BANKING AFTER THE FINANCIAL

CRISIS (JUN. 12, 2012), https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/tarullo20120612a.htm.
[4]

See CAITLIN OSTROFF & ALEXANDER OSIPOVICH, CRYPTOCURRENCY TERRAUSD FALLS BELOW FIXED VALUE, TRIGGERING SELLOFF, WALL

STREET JOURNAL (MAY 9, 2022), https://www.wsj.com/articles/cryptocurrency-terrausd-falls-below-fixed-value-triggering-selloff11652122461.
[5]

See FINANCIAL STABILITY OVERSIGHT COUNCIL, PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUND REFORM, 77 FED.

REG. 69455 (NOV. 19, 2012), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2012-11-19/pdf/2012-28041.pdf
[6]

.

See EXECUTIVE ORDER ON ENSURING RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT OF DIGITAL ASSETS, EXEC. ORDER NO. 14067, 87 FED. REG. 14143

(MAR. 9, 2022), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/03/09/executive-order-on-ensuringresponsible-development-of-digital-assets/.
[7]

See FINANCIAL STABILITY OVERSIGHT COUNCIL, REPORT ON DIGITAL ASSET FINANCIAL STABILITY RISKS AND REGULATION (OCT. 2022),

https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/261/FSOC-Digital-Assets-Report-2022.pdf
[8]

See U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, THE FUTURE OF MONEY AND PAYMENTS (SEPT. 2022),

https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Future-of-Money-and-Payments.pdf
[9]

.

.

See U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, CRYPTO-ASSETS: IMPLICATIONS FOR CONSUMERS, INVESTORS, AND BUSINESSES (SEPT. 2022),

https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/CryptoAsset_EO5.pdf
[10]

.

See TERRI BRADFORD, THE CRYPTIC NATURE OF BLACK CONSUMER CRYPTOCURRENCY OWNERSHIP, FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF KANSAS CITY

(JUN. 1, 2022), https://www.kansascityfed.org/research/payments-system-research-briefings/the-cryptic-nature-of-black-consumercryptocurrency-ownership/.
[11]

See PETER RUDEGEAIR, ALEXANDER OSIPOVICH & DAVID BENOIT, HOW A TINY BANK IN A WASHINGTON FARMING TOWN GOT TANGLED UP

WITH FTX, WALL STREET JOURNAL (JAN. 31, 2023), https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-a-tiny-bank-in-a-washington-farming-towngot-tangled-up-with-ftx-11675178539.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

10/11

3/2/2023

[12]

Remarks by Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Graham Steele Before the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C.…

See FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, PUBLIC REPORT OF ENTITIES SUBMITTING NOTICES FOR A PRIMARY PURPOSE EXCEPTION

(PPE) AS OF 6/24/2022 (JUN. 24, 2022), https://www.fdic.gov/resources/bankers/brokered-deposits/public-report-ppes-notices.pdf
; ALSO CLAIRE WILLIAMS, THE UNLIKELY CRYPTO COMPANIES USING THE TRUMP-ERA ‘HOT MONEY’ RULE, AMERICAN BANKER, (FEB. 6,
2023), https://www.americanbanker.com/news/the-unlikely-crypto-companies-using-the-trump-era-hot-money-rule.
[13]

See BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION & OFFICE OF THE

COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY, JOINT STATEMENT ON CRYPTO-ASSET RISKS TO BANKING ORGANIZATIONS (JAN. 3, 2023),
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/files/bcreg20230103a1.pdf
[14]

See U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, THE FINANCIAL SERVICES SECTOR’S ADOPTION OF CLOUD SERVICES (FEB. 2023),

https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Treasury-Cloud-Report.pdf
[15]

.

.

See U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, U.S. Treasury Department Holds Financial Sector Innovation Policy ROUNDTABLE (FEB.

10, 2021), https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0023.
[16]

See CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, CFPB PROPOSES RULE TO REIN IN EXCESSIVE CREDIT CARD LATE FEES (FEB. 1, 2023),

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-proposes-rule-to-rein-in-excessive-credit-card-late-fees/.
[17]

See BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION & OFFICE OF THE

COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY, AGENCIES REAFFIRM COMMITMENT TO BASEL III STANDARDS (SEPT. 9, 2022),
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/bcreg20220909a.htm.
[18]

See U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, COMMUNITY FINANCE POLICY (DEC. 1, 2022), https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-

stories/community-finance-policy.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1277

11/11