The Act does not limit existing banking powers over digital assets
What the document says“Nothing in this Act may be construed to limit the authority of a depository institution, Federal credit union, State credit union, national bank, or trust company to engage in activities permissible pursuant to applicable State and Federal law, including-- (1) accepting or receiving deposits or shares (in the case of a credit union), and issuing digital assets that represent those deposits or shares”
Subsection (a). Three activities are named: accepting or receiving deposits or shares and issuing digital assets that represent them, using a distributed ledger for the books and records of the entity and to effect intrabank transfers, and providing custodial services for payment stablecoins, private keys or reserves backing payment stablecoins. Section 2(22)(B)(ii) puts a deposit outside the definition of a payment stablecoin, including one recorded using distributed ledger technology.
What the document actually says“Nothing in this Act may be construed to limit the authority of a depository institution, Federal credit union, State credit union, national bank, or trust company to engage in activities permissible pursuant to applicable State and Federal law, including-- (1) accepting or receiving deposits or shares (in the case of a credit union), and issuing digital assets that represent those deposits or shares”
This law does not cut back what banks may already do. They may still take deposits. They may put out digital tokens that stand for those deposits.
Two more powers are named. A bank may keep its books on a shared ledger. It may hold coins and keys for its customers.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.