The Defense Credit Union Council (DCUC) just sent a letter to NCUA Chairman John Crews with a straightforward ask: can you tell us where credit unions actually stand when it comes to state interchange restrictions?
The question didn’t come out of nowhere. Back on September 17, the Conference of State Bank Supervisors dropped a statement about an FDIC proposal dealing with how out-of-state, state-chartered banks stack up against national banks—especially when they’re offering services in states where they don’t have physical branches. Think of it as the regulatory version of “wait, does this apply to us too?”
What DCUC Actually Wants to Know
“We are asking NCUA to explain what protections already exist, where they differ by charter, and what questions remain unresolved,” says Jason Stverak, DCUC’s Chief Advocacy Officer. Translation: let’s get clear on what’s already covered, what’s not, and what still needs figuring out.
And here’s an important nuance—DCUC isn’t assuming that whatever framework applies to banks automatically works for credit unions. Because, well, they operate under completely different legal structures. The letter specifically asks NCUA to spell out the options available under the separate laws that govern credit unions.
Some Progress Already Happened
To be fair, NCUA did make some moves earlier this year. Back in June, the agency issued an interim final rule that clarified federal credit unions’ authority to collect non-interest fees—including those credit and debit card interchange fees everyone’s talking about. That rule went into effect June 30 and also addressed compensation that comes through payment networks, intermediaries, and other third parties.
So there’s already some groundwork laid. The question is whether it’s enough.
The Specifics DCUC Is After
The DCUC letter gets pretty detailed about what they’re looking for. They want:
- An assessment of whether federal credit unions need additional clarification on interstate payment services
- A separate review of what protections exist for federally insured state-chartered credit unions (because those operate under different rules)
- Information about how NCUA is coordinating with other financial regulators
- A clear distinction between what’s already authorized and what might need state action or new legislation
“We would welcome an assessment of direct compliance costs, costs transmitted through service providers, and any differences by institution size,” Stverak adds. Because let’s be honest—compliance costs hit smaller institutions differently than the big players, and that matters.
The letter also asks how any potential regulatory action would mesh with consumer protection requirements, privacy rules, and safety-and-soundness standards. You know, all those other regulations that don’t just disappear because you’re dealing with interchange fees.
This Isn’t DCUC’s First Rodeo
This latest letter builds on a whole series of communications DCUC has sent out this year. They wrote to the OCC on May 29, sent a letter to the House Financial Services Committee on June 22, and submitted comments to NCUA on July 8. Common threads throughout? Federal preemption, payment-processing requirements, compliance concerns for smaller institutions, and services for members who move across state lines or deploy overseas (which, for defense credit unions serving military members, is kind of a big deal).
DCUC wrapped up their latest letter by requesting a written response and offering to sit down with Chairman Crews and agency staff—along with representatives from both federal and state-chartered defense credit unions—to hash out operational questions and provide additional information.
Now we wait to see what NCUA says.