Signals: Misreading the Regulatory Message in BaaS Partnerships

In the evolving landscape of Banking-as-a-Service (BaaS) partnerships, the terms «direct,» «indirect,» and even «truly direct» have sparked confusion and misinterpretation regarding regulatory expectations, according to This Week in Fintech.. These terms, while popular in industry discussions, fail to address the core concerns of bank examiners regarding the safety and soundness of BaaS partnerships.

Recent events have highlighted the regulatory scrutiny on bank-fintech relationships. Banks such as Blue Ridge Bank, Lineage Bank, and First Fed Bank have faced regulatory actions due to insufficient compliance and risk management practices related to their partner banking activities. In response, several banks and platforms, including Metropolitan Commercial Bank (MCB), Piermont Bank, and Treasury Prime, have either reevaluated their BaaS strategies or exited the space entirely.

Operational breakdowns in partnerships between Synapse and Evolve Bank & Trust, as well as Choice Financial Group’s consent order and the sale of CBW Bank, further underscore the importance of regulatory compliance in BaaS partnerships.

Despite these developments, a narrative has emerged suggesting that regulators are cracking down on «indirect» BaaS partnerships and advocating for «direct» relationships between banks and fintechs. This narrative, which implies that regulators may favor «truly direct» partnerships, misses the regulatory intent and could lead to misdirection in the market.

It is crucial for banks and fintech companies to understand that regulatory scrutiny focuses on ensuring that BaaS partnerships do not compromise risk management or compliance obligations. The distinction between «direct» and «indirect» partnerships, while relevant in certain contexts, should not be misinterpreted as a regulatory mandate.

The regulatory message for BaaS partnerships is clear: banks must prioritize risk management and compliance in all partnerships, regardless of the directness of the relationship. Failure to do so could result in regulatory action and reputational damage for all parties involved.

Other articles
EC and CFPB Discuss AI and BNPL Risks for Consumers
Satago and Mmob Partner to Revolutionize Embedded Finance Integration
How AI Has Transformed Embedded Finance: A Closer Look
EC and CFPB Collaborate on AI and BNPL Consumer Risks
Exploring Embedded Finance, Curve’s Referral Program, and Gen Z Loyalty
Joint Accounts from N26 Help Customers Develop ‘Healthy Financial Habits’
Baby Boomers Spearheading Growth in BNPL Services: Unveiling Surprising Demographic Trends
Nubank Ventures into Global Account Market with Wise Partnership
The Future of Payments: Digital Assets and the Redefining of Payments
Credit Unions Aim for Gen Z Deposits and Loyalty
Mixed Reviews from FI Execs on Open Banking
APIs: The Silent Security Risk in Fintech
Santander Launches Openbank Digital Brand in the US and Mexico
Open Banking and Finance in Latin America: A Look into the Future
How Banking-as-a-Service is Promoting Financial Inclusion Worldwide