Proposed Rule: Rules & Regulations 12 CFR Part 701.23—Eligible Obligations

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary
NCUA Rules & Regulations 12 CFR Part 701.23: Eligible Obligations

February 2026
As part of its sixth wave of the “Deregulation Project” NCUA is proposing to amend 12 CFR 701.23, its regulation governing the purchase, sale, and pledge of eligible obligations, by removing prescriptive policy requirements and a detailed conflicts of interest and compensation framework.  

The proposed rule applies only to Federal Credit Unions (FCUs) and does not apply directly to Federally Insured State Chartered Credit Unions (FISCUs). However, Part 741.8 addresses related asset purchases and assumptions of liabilities for FISCUs. The proposal may be read in its entirety here: Eligible Obligations.  

Comments are due to NCUA by April 27, 2026.

Background and Proposed Changes

Part 701.23 currently governs an FCU’s authority to purchase, sell, and pledge eligible obligations, establishing requirements for written policies, board approval, and limitations on purchased obligation amounts.

The Board has determined that several provisions of Part 701.23 are not statutorily required and believes it imposes unnecessary burden. The Board is proposing to amend Part 701.23 by revising paragraphs (b)(6), (c), and (d) and removing paragraph (g). Specific changes include:

  • Paragraphs (b)(6), (c), and (d) would be revised to remove the prescriptive lists of items that must be addressed in an FCU’s written policies for the purchase, sale, and pledge of eligible obligations. FCUs would still be required to maintain written policies but would no longer be subject to a mandated framework, allowing boards to exercise their own business judgment.
  • Paragraph (g) would be removed in its entirety.  The Board considers this framework duplicative and unnecessary as FCUs are already governed by broader conflicts of interest provisions in their bylaws and by the fiduciary duties of their officials.
  • Part 746 would be updated to reflect the redesignation of current paragraph (h) as paragraph (g) following the removal of paragraph (g). No substantive change is intended.

Key Considerations:

  • Although the proposed amendments to Part 701.23 apply only to FCUs, Part 741.8 addresses purchases of assets and assumptions of liabilities for FISCUs and references certain transactions described in Part 701.23(b)(1) or comparable state law for state-chartered credit unions.
  • The proposal would remove prescriptive written policy requirements from paragraphs (b)(6), (c), and (d), enabling a more principles-based approach. FCUs would still be required to maintain written policies for the purchase, sale, and pledge of eligible obligations, but would no longer be subject to mandated lists of specific items those policies must address.
  • The proposal would remove the conflicts of interest and compensation framework in paragraph (g). FCU boards would be permitted to establish their own reasonable policies, provided all transactions are conducted at arm’s length and in the best interest of the credit union.
  • The Board is specifically requesting comment on whether removing these prescriptive policy requirements and the conflicts of interest framework could create safety and soundness concerns or lead to imprudent risk-taking by FCUs.

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary
NCUA Rules & Regulations 12 CFR 701.24: Refund of Interest (Loans)

February 2026
As part of its sixth wave of the “Deregulation Project” NCUA is proposing to rescind 12 CFR Part 701.24, which NCUA states is duplicative of authority already established in the Federal Credit Union Act (FCUA).

Section 701.24 allows FCUs to issue refunds of interest paid by members on loan products. Section 113(9) of the FCUA also empowers FCUs to issue interest refunds. However, § 701.24 also contains a limitation not found in the FCUA, therefore NCUA’s removal of § 701.24 would broaden FCU authority to refund interest.

The proposed rule applies only to Federal Credit Unions (FCUs) and does not apply to Federally Insured State Credit Unions (FISCUs). The proposal may be read in its entirety here: Refund of Interest (Loans).

Comments are due to NCUA by April 27, 2026.

Background and Proposed Change

Part 701.24 codifies the authority granted to FCU boards of directors under Section 113(9) of the FCU Act to authorize interest refunds to members from income earned during a dividend period. The regulation permits refund percentages to vary by loan type and interest rate, allows exclusion of certain loan categories, and limits refunds to periods in which dividends have been declared and paid.  Part 701.24 allows for the refunds only at the end of a dividend period in which dividends were paid on shares.

The Board is proposing to rescind Part 701.24 in its entirety, noting that it is redundant of the authority already granted directly to an FCU’s board of directors in Section 113(9) of the FCU Act. The Board states that Section 113(9) is a clear and self-executing grant of authority, making the regulation unnecessary. Its removal reduces the number of sources FCUs must consult to ensure compliance. By removing § 701.24, NCUA would also eliminate the limitation on paying refunds only when dividends on shares have been paid.

Key Considerations:

  • The proposal would rescind Part 701.24 in its entirety
  • The underlying authority for interest refunds is preserved through Section 113(9) of the FCU Act
  • Applies only to FCUs. The proposal does not apply to FISCUs.
  • The proposal states the Board is especially interested in comments on whether the removal of Part 701.24 provides regulatory relief and whether any portion of the current regulation should be preserved.

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary
NCUA Rules & Regulations Part 706 — Investments in and Licensing of Permitted Payment Stablecoins Issuers

February 2026
The NCUA proposes a new 12 CFR Part 706 to implement its responsibilities under the GENIUS Act[1], which establishes a federal framework for licensing and supervising Permitted Payment Stablecoin Issuers (PPSIs) that are subsidiaries of federally insured credit unions (FICUs).

Key purposes of the rule:

  • Define the licensing process for FICU subsidiaries seeking PPSI status.
  • Establish evaluation standards, application requirements, and timelines.
  • Limit FICUs to investing only in NCUA‑licensed PPSIs.
  • Clarify NCUA supervisory authority over FISCU subsidiaries issuing stablecoins.

A second rulemaking (future) will address prudential standards (capital, liquidity, reserves, technology, etc.). The proposed rule may be read in its entirety here[2].
Comments are due to NCUA by April 13, 2026.

Background

On July 18, 2025, the GENIUS Act became law and established a regulatory framework for payment stablecoins at both the Federal and State level. 

Under the GENIUS Act, “insured depository institutions,” which the Act defines to include both FDIC-insured depository institutions and FICUs (collectively “IDIs”), cannot be issuers of payment stablecoins. Instead, IDIs must issue stablecoins indirectly through subsidiaries.

The GENIUS Act defines the term “subsidiary of an insured credit union” to mean:

  1. an organization providing services to the insured credit union that are associated with the routine operations of credit unions, as described in section 107(7)(I) of the Federal Credit Union Act[3];
  2. a credit union service organization, as such term is used under CFR 12 part 712, with respect to which the insured credit union has an ownership interest or to which the insured credit union has extended a loan; and
  3. a subsidiary of a State chartered insured credit union authorized under State law.

The GENIUS Act requires issuers that are subsidiaries of IDIs (including subsidiaries of FICUs) to be regulated by the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators and does not allow the option for state-level issuer licensing. Thus, the NCUA has jurisdiction over payment stablecoin issuers at all FICU subsidiaries. 

Under the Act, only PPSIs may issue a payment stablecoin in the United States, subject to certain exceptions and safe harbors. PPSIs are subject to a number of requirements, including requirements related to reserves, capital, liquidity, illicit finance, and information technology risk management standards. Among those requirements, PPSIs must maintain reserves backing the stablecoin on a one-to-one basis using U.S. currency or certain other liquid assets, must publicly disclose their redemption policy and publish the details of their reserves monthly.

The GENIUS Act details the process for the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators, which include the NCUA, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve Board), to evaluate and review applications for licenses to be PPSIs and provides examination, supervision, and enforcement authority over PPSIs.

Other issues addressed in the GENIUS Act include the provision of custody services for payment stablecoins; application of the Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering and economic sanctions requirements; and treatment of payment stablecoin issuers in insolvency proceedings. The GENIUS Act establishes clear prohibitions and penalties to prevent the misrepresentation of Federal backing or insurance for payment stablecoins and to ensure that only authorized products may be marketed as such.[4]

The Act explicitly dictates that payment stablecoins are not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, they are not guaranteed by the U.S. Government, nor are they covered by deposit or share insurance from the FDIC or NCUA. Similarly, it is unlawful to market any product as a “payment stablecoin” in the United States unless it is issued pursuant to the GENIUS Act’s procedures.[5]

Finally, the Act imposes a number of rulemaking, review, and reporting requirements on the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators, including the NCUA. This proposal proposes regulations to implement the statutorily required process for licensure of PPSIs subject to the NCUA’s jurisdiction. It also proposes regulations limiting FICUs to invest in NCUA-licensed PPSIs. At least one other forthcoming proposal, intended at this time, will propose regulations to implement the standards and restrictions imposed by the GENIUS Act on PPSIs.

Key Provisions of the Proposed Rule

Licensing Requirement for All FICU Subsidiary Issuers

A FICU (federal or state‑chartered) may only participate in payment stablecoin activity through a licensed subsidiary.

  • FICUs cannot issue stablecoins directly.
  • Only subsidiaries meeting the statutory definition of a “subsidiary of an insured credit union” may apply.
  • Applications must be jointly filed by:
    • the subsidiary (the “Applying Issuer”), and
    • any FICU Parent Company (≥10% voting control or functional control).

Restriction on Investments

FICUs may invest only in NCUA‑licensed PPSIs — even if other federal banking regulators license the issuer.

Application Components

Applications require:

  • Business plan, financials, pro formas.
  • Governance and management information.
  • Biographical & Financial Reports for officers/directors of:
    • the Applying Issuer,
    • It’s FICU Parent(s),
    • any “Principal Shareholders” (≥10% non‑FICU owners).
  • Fingerprints for Issuer officers/directors.
  • Written certification that submissions contain no material misrepresentations.

Evaluation Standards

NCUA evaluates applications using statutory factors, including:

  • Ability to meet GENIUS Act reserve, redemption, and operational requirements.
  • Competence, experience, and integrity of officers, directors, and major shareholders.
  • Compliance history.
  • Safety and soundness considerations.
  • Strength and feasibility of the business plan.
  • Adequate capital and liquidity planning.

Timelines

  • 30 days: NCUA must notify whether an application is “substantially complete.”
  • 120 days after substantially complete notice: NCUA must approve or deny.
  • NCUA failure to respond within approval deadline means automatic approval.

Denials and Appeals

NCUA may deny issuer license only if activity would be unsafe or unsound.
Applicants get:

  • Detailed written explanation within 30 days of denial,
  • Right to a written/oral hearing before the NCUA Board within 30 days of appeal request if appeal request submitted within 30 days of denial notice,
  • Right to reapply.

Change in Control

A FICU becoming a new Parent Company of an existing PPSI must provide:

  • 60‑day prior notice to NCUA,
  • Governance/competency disclosures.

AML / Sanctions Certification

Within 180 days of approval, and annually after, PPSIs must certify:

  • AML and sanctions compliance programs exist and are effective.
  • Failure to certify can result in revocation.

Treatment of Multi‑Tier Subsidiary Structures

All tiers of subsidiaries beneath a FICU (including FISCU subsidiaries) are treated as FICU subsidiaries for PPSI purposes.

Significant Considerations for State‑Chartered Credit Unions (FISCUs)

Although this is a federal rule, it directly impacts FISCUs in several ways:

FISCU Subsidiaries Are Fully Subject to NCUA Approval

  • Any FISCU subsidiary issuing stablecoins must be licensed by NCUA.
  • GENIUS Act does not allow a FISCU subsidiary to choose state regulation for PPSI status.

A FISCU’s Subsidiary Need Not Be a CUSO

The GENIUS Act definition of “FICU subsidiary” is broader than the NCUA CUSO regulation:

  • A FISCU subsidiary can qualify even if it does not primarily serve credit unions, meaning some state‑authorized subsidiaries fall under NCUA oversight even though they are not CUSOs today.

Potential Conflicts with State Law Powers

State law may authorize FISCUs to invest in or form broader types of subsidiaries than FCUs can, but under the proposed rule:

  • Any subsidiary intending to issue a payment stablecoin must comply with Part 706 regardless of state authority.
  • FISCUs must provide extensive governance and financial disclosures to NCUA.

Impact on State Investment Authority

The rule would prohibit FISCUs from:

  • Investing in PPSIs licensed by other federal regulators unless they also obtain an NCUA license.
  • Investing in state‑qualified PPSIs (regulated under state law alone).

This may limit options available under state investment statutes.

Examination and Supervision

FISCU subsidiaries licensed as PPSIs fall under:

  • NCUA’s direct exam authority (greater than traditional CUSO access-rights),
  • Ongoing AML/sanctions certification requirements,
  • Future prudential standards in forthcoming rulemakings.

This represents a new federal supervisory footprint over FISCU subsidiaries.

Key Considerations for State Regulators (SSAs)

Preemption and State Authority

The GENIUS Act provides:

  • Federal PPSI licensing preempts state licensing/chartering requirements for PPSI activities.
  • BUT it does not preempt:
    • State authority over the FISCU itself,
    • State supervision of the FISCU’s subsidiary for non‑PPSI activities.

Implication: SSAs retain chartering and safety/soundness authority, but NCUA becomes the primary regulator for stablecoin‑issuing subsidiaries.

Supervisory Coordination Challenges

Because:                                                             

  • FISCUs can create subsidiaries engaged in activities broader than CUSO activities, and
  • NCUA gains increased supervisory exam authority over those subsidiaries,

SSAs may need to increase coordination with NCUA on:

  • Subsidiary examination scopes,
  • IT/cyber reviews,
  • AML and sanctions program examinations,
  • Remediation of unsafe/unsound practices.

Monitoring Investment Limits

For FCUs, GENIUS Act ties subsidiaries back to the 1% CUSO investment cap.
For FISCUs:

  • State law investment limits still apply,
  • But NCUA approval and oversight impose practical constraints on ownership structures of PPSIs.

SSAs may need to monitor:

  • Whether FISCUs’ stablecoin activity increases risk to the share insurance fund,
  • Parent‑company change‑of‑control notifications.

Multi‑Tier Entities

NCUA treats all tiers of subsidiaries beneath a FISCU as PPSI‑subject entities if used for stablecoin issuance.

States may need to ensure consistent state‑level awareness of complex structures.

Consumer and Operational Risk Oversight

Future NCUA rulemakings will address:

  • Reserve requirements,
  • Redemption rights,
  • Technology and cybersecurity standards,
  • Incident reporting.

SSAs may expect significant operational complexity for FISCUs entering the stablecoin space.

[1] Public Law 119-27

[2] 91 FR 6531

[3] 12 U.S.C. 1757(7)(I)

[4] See 12 U.S.C. 5903(e).

[5] 12 U.S.C. 5903(e)(3).

NASCUS Summary

FinCEN Exceptive Relief from Requirement to Identify and Verify Beneficial Owners at Each Account Opening

February 2026

Through Order FIN-2026-R001, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is granting exceptive relief from requirements governing the identification and verification of beneficial owners of legal entity customers at each account opening under its Customer Due Diligence Rule[1]. Under the order, financial institutions will no longer be required to reidentify and reverify beneficial owners each time an existing legal entity customer/member opens additional accounts.

The order affects all covered financial institutions[2] and may be read in its entirety here. NCUA’s accompanying notice to credit unions regarding the order is available here.

Background

FinCEN’s 2016 Customer Due Diligence (CDD) Rule requires covered financial institutions to identify and verify the beneficial owners of legal entity customers when opening new accounts. The rule was designed to address a deficiency in the anti-money laundering (AML) framework by improving transparency around the individuals who own or control legal entities and preventing misuse of the financial system for illicit activity.

Under the existing rule, institutions must collect and verify beneficial ownership information each time an existing legal entity customer opens a new account, even if the institution recently verified the same information. This requirement has been viewed as duplicative and burdensome, without materially improving AML outcomes.

On February 13, 2026, FinCEN issued Order FIN-2026-R001 granting exceptive relief from this requirement as part of broader efforts to modernize the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) framework and to support its obligations under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) to revise the 2016 CDD Rule.

Summary

The order permits covered financial institutions to stop identifying and verifying beneficial owners of a legal entity customer at every subsequent account opening.

Instead, institutions may limit identification and verification to three circumstances:

  1. When a legal entity customer first opens an account with the institution.
  2. When the institution has knowledge of facts that would reasonably call into question the reliability of beneficial ownership information previously obtained about the legal entity customer.
  3. As needed based on an organization’s risk-based procedures for ongoing customer due diligence.

Institutions may rely on previously collected beneficial ownership information if the customer certifies or confirms that the information remains accurate, and the institution must retain records of such confirmation. All other AML/CFT obligations under the BSA, including ongoing monitoring, suspicious activity reporting, and program requirements, remain unchanged.

The order states use of the exceptive relief is optional, and institutions may choose to continue existing practices if consistent with their risk profile or internal controls.

NCUA also reiterates the above by stating it is optional and credit unions are not required to use it.

Key Considerations

  • The order removes a repetitive procedural requirement but does not alter core AML program obligations, including risk-based monitoring and updating customer information.
  • Institutions relying on the relief will need to continue to maintain well-documented risk-based CDD policies and procedures that address when previously obtained beneficial ownership information should be updated or re-verified.
  • If an institution relies on prior beneficial ownership information, it must maintain documentation confirming that the customer certified or confirmed its accuracy.

Credit unions and other covered financial institutions may continue collecting beneficial ownership information at each account opening if doing so aligns with their risk tolerance or supervisory expectations.

[1] FinCEN, Customer Due Diligence Requirements for Financial Institutions, 81 FR 29398 (May 11, 2016)

[2] The phrase “covered financial institutions” is defined by reference at 31 C.F.R. § 1010.230(f)

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary

NCUA Rules & Regulations 12 CFR Part 701 IRPS 06-1 Organization and Operation of Federal Credit Unions

February 2026

As part of its fifth wave of the “Deregulation Project” NCUA is proposing to remove Interpretive Ruling and Policy Statement (IRPS) 06-1 related to Federal Credit Union (FCU) chartering and field of membership guidance, due to the statement being redundant with existing provisions in NCUA’s FCU  Chartering and Field of Membership Manual.

The proposed rule does not apply to Federally Insured State Credit Unions (FISCUs) and may be read in its entirety here.

Comments are due to NCUA by April 13, 2026.

Background

In 2006, the NCUA Board issued IRPS 06-1 as a final rule amending FCU field of membership regulations to limit underserved area additions to multiple common bond credit unions and to revise facility requirements applicable to underserved areas.

In 2010, NCUA  incorporated relevant policies and procedures for FCUs into the Chartering and Field of Membership Manual (Part 701 Appendix B), which now serves as the primary source of governing guidance for FCU chartering and membership determinations.

With the policies established in IRPS 06-1 now being reflected in the Chartering and Field of Membership Manual the Board is proposing, as a part of its ongoing Deregulation Project, to remove IRPS 06-1 after determining that the statement is duplicative and no longer necessary as a standalone document.

Key Considerations

  • No change to underlying FCU field of membership or chartering obligations. Removal of IRPS 06-1 would not alter FCU obligations under the applicable statutory or regulatory requirements.
  • FCUs should rely on the Chartering and Field of Membership Manual as the controlling source of guidance.

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary

NCUA Rules & Regulations 12 CFR Part §741.5: Notice of Termination of Excess Insurance Coverage

January 2026

As part of its fourth wave of the “Deregulation Project” NCUA is proposing an amendment to its rule governing notice requirements related to the termination of excess share insurance coverage under 12 CFR Part 741.5

The proposed rule applies to all Federally Insured Credit Unions (FICUs) and may be read in its entirety here: Notice of Termination of Excess Insurance Coverage.

Comments are due to NCUA by March 30, 2026.

Summary

12 CFR Part 741 of the NCUA’s regulations implements Title II of the Federal Credit Union Act (FCU), which governs the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (SIF). It prescribes requirements that all FICUs must satisfy to obtain and maintain federal share insurance, as well as payment of insurance premiums and the capitalization of deposit, with the SIF.

Part 741.5 addresses notice requirements applicable when a FICU terminates share insurance coverage in excess of that provided by the SIF.  The rule is intended to ensure that members are informed when supplemental share insurance coverage is discontinued.

Under the current rule, a FICU is required to:

  • Provide written notice to all members at least 30 days prior to the effective date of termination of any excess share insurance coverage

The NCUA Board proposes to amend Part 741.5 by removing the specific requirement that members be notified 30 days in advance of the termination of excess share insurance coverage.  Under the proposal, a credit union would instead be required to notify members prior to the termination of the coverage, without a defined advance notice period.

Why?

NCUA has proposed the amendment based on its determination that the existing 30-day advance notice requirement is overly prescriptive and may create unnecessary regulatory burden without enhancing safety and soundness. 

The Board has indicated that requiring member notification prior to termination of excess share insurance coverage, without mandating a specific timeframe, provides credit unions with greater flexibility while continuing to ensure members are informed.

Key Considerations:

  • Credit Unions would still be required to notify members prior to termination of any excess share insurance coverage, with only the timing requirement removed
  • Only the prescriptive timing requirement is addressed in the proposal.  There are no new obligations or other modifying aspects that are considered in the proposal

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary
NCUA Rules & Regulations 12 CFR Part §741.10: Disclosure of Share Insurance

January 2026

As part of its fourth wave of the “Deregulation Project” NCUA is proposing to remove 12 CFR §741.10. This provision applies to state credit unions that are allowed to accept non-member deposits under state law, excluding deposits from other credit unions, public units, and non-member deposits in Low-Income Credit Unions (LICUs).

The proposed rule applies to all Federally Insured Credit Unions (FICUs) and may be read in its entirety here: Disclosure of Share Insurance.

Comments are due to NCUA by March 30, 2026.

Summary

Part 741 of the NCUA’s regulations implements Title II of the Federal Credit Union Act (FCU), which governs the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (SIF). It prescribes requirements that all FICUs must satisfy to obtain and maintain federal share insurance, as well as payment of insurance premiums and the capitalization of deposits with the SIF. 

Currently, Part 741.10 requires Federally Insured State-Chartered Credit Unions (FISCUs) that are permitted by state law to accept non-member shares or deposits to:

  • Identify non-member accounts as such on required reports for insurance purposes.
  • Notify non-member share and deposit holders in writing that their accounts are not insured by the SIF, and
  • Notify any future non-member share and deposit fund holders in writing as they open accounts.

The NCUA Board is proposing to remove Part 741.10 of Subpart A in its entirety.

Why?

NCUA states that Part 741.10 is unnecessary and redundant because the same or similar disclosure obligations are already imposed on FISCUs through their contractual SIF agreement and reporting obligations.  According to the preamble in the proposal, current NCUA form 9600[1], “Information to be Provided in Support of the Application of a State Chartered Credit Union for Insurance of Accounts” maintains the same requirements.

Key Considerations:

  • While certain FCUs may accept non-member deposits, the removal of Part 741.10 primarily affects FISCUs that are permitted under state law to accept non-member shares or deposits. Credit unions that do not accept non-member shares would see no practical impact.
  • The proposal removes the requirement in Part 741.10, however, does not change the obligations to notify non-member depositors that the deposits are uninsured without replacing or introducing any new obligations for credit unions.  
  • The Board has asked for additional comments relating to whether changes should be made to Part 741.9 regarding the prohibition on offering member shares not eligible for federal share insurance coverage.
    • Background: NCUA has previously expressed concern that if uninsured member shares were to be allowed it could create member confusion regarding coverage since the FCU indicates an intent to provide insurance coverage.

[1] https://ncua.gov/files/publications/resources-expansion/NCUA_9600.pdf

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary
NCUA Rules & Regulations 12 CFR Part §741.2: Maximum Borrowing Authority

January 2026

As part of its fourth wave of the “Deregulation Project.” NCUA is proposing to remove 12 CFR §741.2 in its entirety.

The proposed rule applies to all Federally Insured Credit Unions (FICUs) and may be read in its entirety here: Requirements for Insurance; Maximum Borrowing Authority.

Comments are due to NCUA by March 30, 2026.

Summary

12 CFR Part §741 of the NCUA’s regulations implements Title II of the Federal Credit Union Act (FCU), which governs the Share Insurance Fund. It prescribes requirements that all Federally Insured Credit Unions (FICUs) must satisfy to obtain and maintain federal share insurance, as well as payment of insurance premiums and the capitalization of deposit, with the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (NCUSIF). 

Part 741.2 currently establishes a maximum borrowing authority for FICUs by limiting aggregate borrowing from any source to no more than 50% of paid-in and unimpaired capital and surplus.

The NCUA Board is proposing to remove Part 741.2 in its entirety.

Why?

NCUA states that removing Part 741.2 would eliminate an unnecessary provision that duplicates the statutory maximum[1] borrowing limit applicable to federal credit unions of an aggregate amount in excess of 50 per centum of its paid-in and unimpaired capital and surplus (shares and undivided earnings, plus net income or minus net loss).

For FISCUs, NCUA states that Part 741.2 reflects a discretionary federal policy choice that not only extends the federal borrowing limit to FISCUs but also creates a complex waiver process.

The Board has reconsidered whether this federal borrowing limit is necessary for safety and soundness and instead finds the current requirements impose unnecessary burden without a corresponding statutory mandate or significant safety and soundness benefit.

The proposal also states that safety and soundness considerations related to borrowing, especially with FISCUs, can be monitored through risk-based examination and supervision process, including coordination with state regulators, where applicable.

Key Considerations:

  • This proposal primarily affects FISCUs.  NCUA notes the provision is duplicative for FCUs whose borrowing limit is established in statute: Part 701.32; 12 U.S.C. §1757(9).
  • The proposal describes the removal as simplifying the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) without alerting FCU obligations or the Board’s authority.
  • While FCU borrowing limits would remain unchanged because they are set in statute, removing Part 741.2 would eliminate the federal regulatory borrowing limits for FISCUs.  Borrowing authority for FISCUs would therefore be governed primarily by state laws, reinforcing the dual-chartering system.
  • With this proposal NCUA is specifically requesting comments around redundancy and impacts:
    • Are these provisions redundant of existing statutory authority (including state laws and regulations)? Removing 741.2 has the potential to create a reality for FISCUs in states that don’t have limitations, or maintain thresholds below FCU authority, that could enhance or diminish parity depending on a state’s level.
    • Would elimination simplify compliance without negatively impacting regulatory clarity or safety and soundness?

[1] 12 U.S.C. §1757(9)

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary
NCUA Rules & Regulations 12 CFR 701.32(b)(2): Changes for Public Unit and Non-Member Shares

January 2026

As part of its fourth wave of the “Deregulation Project” NCUA is proposing an amendment of its rule relating to public unit and non-member shares, Part §701.32, by removing the requirement in paragraph (b)(2) for a credit union’s board of directors to adopt a written plan documenting intended usage of borrowings, public unit, or non-member shares, if the funds exceed 70% of the FICU’s paid-in and unimpaired capital and surplus.

The proposed rule applies to all Federally Insured Credit Unions (FICUs) including Federally Insured State Credit Unions (FISCUs) through 12 CFR 741.204 and may be read in its entirety here: Changes for Public Unit and Non-Member Shares

Comments are due to NCUA by March 30, 2026.

Summary

Part §701.32 governs the acceptance of share deposits from public units and certain non-members, including other credit unions, by FICUs. NCUA states the purpose of the rule is intended to ensure that these funding sources are used in a manner that supports a credit union’s members while appropriately managing liquidity, concentration, and safety and soundness risks. 

The rule establishes:

  • Aggregate limits on public unit and non-member shares.
  • Written plan requirement when public unit and non-member shares, together with borrowings, exceed specified thresholds.
  • Operational limitations and due diligence expectations related to the acceptance and use of these funds.

The Board’s proposal would remove the written board plan requirement tied to funding levels that exceed 70% of capital and surplus.

Why?

NCUA has proposed amending §701.32based on its determination that the written plan requirement within the rule is overly prescriptive and creates unnecessary administrative burden without enhancing safety and soundness. 

The Board has stated credit unions should be able to manage share funding sources based on risk management practices and supervisory review, versus a one-size fits all plan mandate.

Key Considerations:

  • FICUs will remain subject to aggregate limits found in Part 701.32(b)(1) restricting total public unit and nonmember deposits to 50% of the net amount of paid-in and unimpaired capital and surplus.
  • FICUs will continue to be subject to the existing regulatory frameworks governing these types of shares.
  • The proposal reflects a shift toward allowing credit unions to use internal policies and procedures to show risk management rather than relying on a specific regulatory requirement.
  • While §701.32 applies to FICUs, Federally Insured State-Chartered Credit Unions (FISCUs) that apply for and maintain insurance are subject to the requirements of §701.32 under 12 CFR §741.204.

NASCUS Summary re: CFPB Agency Information Collection Activities (Consumer Response Intake Form)
CFPB 2026-0005
January 30, 2026

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued a request for comment regarding their request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to extend an information collection entitled “Consumer Response Intake Form.”

Comments are due by March 2, 2026, and the request for comments can be found here.

Summary

The Consumer Response Intake Form is designed to aid consumers in the submission of complaints, inquiries, and feedback and to help the Bureau fulfill its statutory requirements. Consumers will be able to complete and submit information through the Intake Form electronically on the Bureau’s website. Consumers may also request that the Bureau mail a paper copy of the Intake Form to them. The form prompts consumers for a description of, and key facts about, the complaint at issue, the desired resolution, contact and account information, information about the company they are submitting a complaint about, and previous action taken to attempt to resolve the complaint.

Comments

The CFPB is publishing this notice and soliciting comments on (i) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the CFPB, including whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) the accuracy of the CFPB’s estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methods and the assumptions used; (iii) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary
NCUA Rules & Regulations—Part 701.31 Nondiscrimination Requirements

January 2026

As part of its third wave of the “Deregulation Project” NCUA is proposing the removal of its rule relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements, Part 701.31.

The proposed rule does not apply to Federally Insured State Chartered Credit Unions (FISCUs) and may be read in its entirety here: Nondiscrimination Requirements

Comments are due to NCUA by March 16, 2026.

Summary

Part 701.31 is NCUA’s longstanding rule addressing nondiscrimination in real estate lending for federal credit unions.  The rule was created to reinforce federal fair lending laws by summarizing expectations as it relates to the following:

  • Equal access to housing-related credit
  • Non-discriminatory lending practices
  • Fair appraisals
  • Non-discriminatory advertising and signage

By incorporating federal nondiscrimination laws into the NCUA’s regulatory framework it has served as a reference point for examinations and reviews.

The NCUA Board proposes to remove Part 701.31 in its entirety.

Why?

NCUA has proposed the removal of 701.31 because it is duplicative of other existing, more comprehensive federal discrimination laws, including Fair Housing Act (FHA) and Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), and creates unnecessary burden for credit unions. NCUA has determined that maintaining the standalone regulation does not expand or clarify these statutory requirements.

The removal would not change credit unions’ compliance obligations regarding these statutory requirements.

Key Considerations:

  • No change to underlying compliance obligations. Removal of Part 701.31 would not alter the Federal Credit Union (FCU’s) responsibility to comply with all federal and state nondiscrimination laws
  • NCUA would rely on existing statutes and state laws to govern nondiscrimination requirements
    • Examinations will continue to assess nondiscrimination compliance

NASCUS Proposed Rule Summary
NCUA Rules & Regulations: Interpretative Ruling and Policy Statement 08-2 and Community Chartering Policies 10-1

January 2026

As part of its third phase of the “Deregulation Project,” NCUA is proposing the removal of its rules relating to Interpretive Ruling and Policy Statements Service to Underserved Areas 08-2 and Community Chartering Policies 10-1.

The proposed rules do not apply to Federally Insured State Credit Unions (FISCUs) and may be read in their entirety here: Service to Underserved Areas 08-2 and Community Chartering Polices 10-1.

Comments are due to NCUA by March 16, 2026.

Summary

Interpretive Ruling and Policy Statement (IRPS) 08-2 Service to Underserved Areas and 10-1 Community Chartering Policies are NCUA’s interpretive guidance governing how credit unions may serve underserved areas, including through the expansion of field of membership (FOM) authority.  The policy statements outline the eligibility criteria and parameters for credit unions that seek to demonstrate service to communities that lack adequate access to financial services.

Guidance has historically focused on identifying underserved areas based on economic distress indicators and census-based criteria.  This has provided a framework for federal credit unions to expand services while maintaining safety and soundness.

IRPS 08-2 outlines how credit unions may demonstrate service to underserved areas, including the criteria used to identify communities with limited access to financial services.  IRPS 10-1 addresses the standards and considerations used in evaluating community charter applications, including how geographic areas and community boundaries are defined.

NCUA incorporated the policies originally defined in IRPS 08-2 and IRPS 10-1 into the Chartering Manual in 2010, which now serves as the source for field-of-membership policies and procedures.  Accordingly, the NCUA Board has proposed to eliminate IRPS 08-2 and IRPS 10-1 in their entirety as redundant now that they have been incorporated verbatim in the Federal Credit Union (FCU) Chartering Manual (Part 701 Appendix B).

Key Considerations:

  • No change to the underlying FCU field of membership or chartering obligations. Removal of IRPS 08-2 and IRPS 10-1 would not alter FCU obligations under the applicable statutory or regulatory requirements
  • NCUA would rely on existing statutes to govern service to underserved areas and chartering – the information is housed in NCUA’s Chartering Manual