Revolut Marks Nearly Six Months Waiting for U.S. Bank Charter While Crypto Trust Banks Advance
Key Takeaways
- •Revolut has received conditional approval from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency but has waited nearly six months for a full U.S. bank charter.
- •Revolut currently serves U.S. customers through app-based services built on partner-bank arrangements and targets a 2027 U.S. bank launch.
- •Crypto-focused trust banks, which focus on custody and asset safeguarding rather than deposits and lending, appear to be moving through the regulatory queue faster than Revolut.
- •A full charter would let Revolut offer deposits and lending under its own name and reduce dependence on partner banks.
- •If crypto trust banks establish themselves first, they may shape how digital assets are held and served in the United States before Revolut completes its charter.

Fintech giant Revolut has now waited nearly six months for a U.S. bank charter, a delay that stands out as crypto-focused trust banks appear to move through the regulatory queue ahead of it. The gap underscores how different banking approval paths in the United States can proceed at very different speeds — a dynamic that matters for any fintech or crypto firm planning its entry into the world's largest financial market.
Why Revolut's U.S. Bank Charter Wait Matters
A U.S. bank charter is the legal permission a company needs to operate as a bank. It allows a firm to hold customer deposits directly rather than relying on a partner bank behind the scenes. For Revolut, a UK-headquartered fintech that today serves U.S. customers through app-based services built on partner-bank arrangements, that permission would mark a major step. The company has already earned conditional approval from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency — the independent bureau of the U.S. Treasury that charters and supervises national banks — and has set its sights on a 2027 U.S. bank launch.
The nearly six-month wait matters because timing shapes strategy. A full charter would let Revolut offer deposits and lending under its own name, deepening its U.S. presence beyond the app-based services it operates today. It would also reduce the company's dependence on partner banks, whose own regulatory health can directly affect a fintech's customers — an issue that has driven other fintechs in the sector to pursue charters of their own. The OCC's public record of charter interpretations and decisions shows how these approvals move through official review.
How Crypto Trust Banks Are Moving Ahead
A trust bank is a narrower kind of institution. It focuses on holding and safeguarding assets for clients rather than taking everyday deposits and making loans like a full-service bank. That narrower scope is precisely what makes the two tracks hard to compare directly: the applications themselves ask regulators different questions.
Crypto-native firms have leaned into this trust bank path. Because a trust charter covers custody and asset-holding rather than the full range of banking, it can follow a different — sometimes faster — approval track than the broad charter Revolut is pursuing.
That contrast sits at the heart of the story. Reporting by the Financial Times pointed to the widening gap between Revolut's prolonged wait and crypto firms advancing in the queue. A separate CryptoSlate analysis described the situation as a two-tier banking system, in which different applicants meet very different timelines.
An important caveat: a different approval track does not mean one model is universally easier. The trust bank path and the full charter path are simply not the same, and they can clear review at different speeds.
What the Divergence Signals for U.S. Crypto and Fintech
For large fintech entrants, a slower charter process is a planning challenge. It stretches out the timeline before a company can launch its full product suite in the world's biggest financial market.
For crypto infrastructure firms, trust bank momentum points to opportunity. Custody and asset-safeguarding services can reach the market while broader banking applications sit in review.
This split touches competition and customer access. If crypto trust banks establish themselves first, they may shape how digital assets are held and served in the United States before a fintech like Revolut — which has already moved into stablecoins with its euro-backed stablecoin EURR and an EU rollout of that token — completes its own charter.
The practical takeaway: the type of charter behind a company tells you what it can legally do. A trust bank may safeguard assets, while a full bank charter signals a firm that can offer deposits, lending, and a wider set of services under U.S. rules. What to watch next is whether the OCC converts Revolut's conditional approval into a final charter on the timeline the company has laid out — and whether more crypto firms follow the trust bank route while full-charter applicants wait.