Q&A: Former U.S. Comptroller Thomas Curry, Now At Boston Firm, Is Still Fintech Advocate
Curry sounded off on his new law firm gig, fintech regulation and how his successors are doing over at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency,
November 29, 2017 at 03:10 PM
15 minute read
Thomas J. “Tom” Curry, Nutter, Boston
Nearly seven months after departing his top post at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Thomas Curry has landed at a Boston law firm.
Curry, who was integral in leading the federal banking regulator's efforts in advancing financial technology, including through the proposal of a special purpose national bank charter for fintechs, joined Nutter McClennen & Fish this week. He is a partner and will co-lead Nutter's Banking and Financial Services practice group.
“Tom's experience, insights and perspective will bring tremendous value to our banking, financial institution and fintech clients,” said Deborah Manus, a managing partner at the firm, in a press release Tuesday.
Curry spoke to the National Law Journal about his new role at Nutter and his thoughts about the future of fintech. The conversation has been edited for clarity and length.
National Law Journal: Why did you decide to join Nutter?
Thomas Curry: First off, I think Nutter's a great firm. I had an opportunity to work with its partners when I was commissioner of Banks and prior to that being an attorney and deputy in the Banking Department. So it's a long-standing relationship. It really was a great fit. And there's the fact that my home has always been in Boston. It was an opportunity to come home and be productive. I just jumped at the chance.
How involved with fintech do you plan to be?
That will be a key area and something I'm excited about working with the other members of the firm on. Fintech is interesting, especially if you're talking about online lending and marketplace lending. It's an intersection of consumer protection laws, which I've dealt with throughout my career, and seeing how they fit in the fintech environment.
Also, I advocated [for] the special purpose national bank charter [at the OCC], so I hope to help firms and boards of directors actually navigate that process: What are the pros and cons? Does it work? Is it worth the resources and the potential structural changes to obtain either a full service national bank charter that has FDIC insurance or the special purpose national bank charter if the new comptroller does, which I hope he will, pursue [that initiative]?
Do you expect the fintech charter will, in fact, move forward?
I am very hopeful. I think it's very unfortunate that litigation [brought by state banking regulators over whether the OCC has authority to issue charters for fintechs] has put [up] a potential roadblock in terms of pursuing the charter. From my standpoint, I would not have pursued the charter without being very comfortable with the legal foundation for it. Now it's just a matter of getting the court to agree with the OCC's position.
Who should apply for the fintech charter?
Ultimately it's going to be a decision for an institution to make. In terms of having a charter, I think it's a gold seal of approval that can differentiate fintech firms from one another. The firms are going to have to identify if they want to make the investment and establishing the framework and deciding if it fits in their business plan. Ultimately that's a business decision.
Coming back to my role at Nutter, I think boards and management really want to have some insight as to how it would work, what the twists and turns might be in that process and again [I'll be] providing advice and direction to them.
How will you advise clients in the meantime until any special purpose charter is finalized?
Today institutions, banks as well, need to be making strategic decisions about which direction they're going in. Well before you decide whether to apply to a fintech charter, you should be thinking through the process, so I think the time is now.
Will you be advising clients to participate in the “sandbox” or fintech pilot program announced by the OCC?
I think that's all part of a process of walking through with an institution, whether it's a bank or a fintech firm, what are the options? This is really an opportunity to see if banks and fintech firms can marry up product development with the Office of Innovation's [an agency office established in 2016 to offer a formal framework for responsible innovation in finance] pilot process and actually do something creative but also get that insight from the regulatory side upfront rather than develop a fintech project, only to find out that you've got a fair lending issue that was built in because of your algorithms and what they're based on. I think there's a lot of merit and a lot of benefit to utilizing that pilot process.
What are your expectations as to what your successor, Joseph Otting, will be focused on at the OCC?
As he said in his confirmation hearing, The Responsible Innovation initiative is really to make the national bank system cutting edge and to make it serve communities and businesses' credit needs, so I think there's an openness to rethinking structural things. I think fintech has the opportunity to reduce costs for the banks that he supervises and also part of the mission for the OCC is to make sure consumers are served. I think fintech has an enormous potential to bring unbanked or underbanked people into mainstream financial services.
What's your take on how Keith Noreika, who served as acting comptroller after your departure, led the OCC in the interim?
I'm going to follow the lead on my predecessors and really not comment on the successors' initiatives or steps. The only thing I will say is the OCC really has an important mission, which is to preserve the safety and soundness of the national bank system. That really requires a credible supervisory approach, and I'm confident that is something the OCC will do.
What about Noreika's comments about how the mix of commerce and banking might not be the worst idea?
I'm not going to comment on that.
In what other ways do you plan to work to improve the banking and financial services industry?
I think this was a theme I tried to emphasize throughout my career, but there's really a need to demystify the regulatory framework to both management and boards of directors. I hope that I can provide that to financial institutions.
Banking is highly regulated. As comptroller, I would use public speaking opportunities to identify emerging issues that banks should think about before the examiner showed up on the doorstep. That's also what drove a lot of the guidance that was issued.
As someone who has overseen state and federal banking, do you think there are ways that the OCC and Conference of State Bank Supervisors can better work together?
I think 90 percent of the time they do work well together. Justice Louis Brandeis co-founded Nutter. He's famous for calling the states “laboratories for change.” The fintech initiatives and the Responsible Innovation initiatives at the OCC really are a live example of a laboratory of change. Aside from the litigation, which I think is unfortunate, it has pushed the states to rethink the multistate licensing and supervision process they have trying to streamline it to be more cooperative on an interstate basis.
The OCC was created by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863 for a reason: to create the national framework for banking to benefit the economy. Fast-forward to the 21st century, I think the fintech firms are looking for the same type of national footprint to operate under.
Thomas J. “Tom” Curry, Nutter, Boston
Nearly seven months after departing his top post at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Thomas Curry has landed at a Boston law firm.
Curry, who was integral in leading the federal banking regulator's efforts in advancing financial technology, including through the proposal of a special purpose national bank charter for fintechs, joined
“Tom's experience, insights and perspective will bring tremendous value to our banking, financial institution and fintech clients,” said Deborah Manus, a managing partner at the firm, in a press release Tuesday.
Curry spoke to the National Law Journal about his new role at Nutter and his thoughts about the future of fintech. The conversation has been edited for clarity and length.
National Law Journal: Why did you decide to join Nutter?
Thomas Curry: First off, I think Nutter's a great firm. I had an opportunity to work with its partners when I was commissioner of Banks and prior to that being an attorney and deputy in the Banking Department. So it's a long-standing relationship. It really was a great fit. And there's the fact that my home has always been in Boston. It was an opportunity to come home and be productive. I just jumped at the chance.
How involved with fintech do you plan to be?
That will be a key area and something I'm excited about working with the other members of the firm on. Fintech is interesting, especially if you're talking about online lending and marketplace lending. It's an intersection of consumer protection laws, which I've dealt with throughout my career, and seeing how they fit in the fintech environment.
Also, I advocated [for] the special purpose national bank charter [at the OCC], so I hope to help firms and boards of directors actually navigate that process: What are the pros and cons? Does it work? Is it worth the resources and the potential structural changes to obtain either a full service national bank charter that has FDIC insurance or the special purpose national bank charter if the new comptroller does, which I hope he will, pursue [that initiative]?
Do you expect the fintech charter will, in fact, move forward?
I am very hopeful. I think it's very unfortunate that litigation [brought by state banking regulators over whether the OCC has authority to issue charters for fintechs] has put [up] a potential roadblock in terms of pursuing the charter. From my standpoint, I would not have pursued the charter without being very comfortable with the legal foundation for it. Now it's just a matter of getting the court to agree with the OCC's position.
Who should apply for the fintech charter?
Ultimately it's going to be a decision for an institution to make. In terms of having a charter, I think it's a gold seal of approval that can differentiate fintech firms from one another. The firms are going to have to identify if they want to make the investment and establishing the framework and deciding if it fits in their business plan. Ultimately that's a business decision.
Coming back to my role at Nutter, I think boards and management really want to have some insight as to how it would work, what the twists and turns might be in that process and again [I'll be] providing advice and direction to them.
How will you advise clients in the meantime until any special purpose charter is finalized?
Today institutions, banks as well, need to be making strategic decisions about which direction they're going in. Well before you decide whether to apply to a fintech charter, you should be thinking through the process, so I think the time is now.
Will you be advising clients to participate in the “sandbox” or fintech pilot program announced by the OCC?
I think that's all part of a process of walking through with an institution, whether it's a bank or a fintech firm, what are the options? This is really an opportunity to see if banks and fintech firms can marry up product development with the Office of Innovation's [an agency office established in 2016 to offer a formal framework for responsible innovation in finance] pilot process and actually do something creative but also get that insight from the regulatory side upfront rather than develop a fintech project, only to find out that you've got a fair lending issue that was built in because of your algorithms and what they're based on. I think there's a lot of merit and a lot of benefit to utilizing that pilot process.
What are your expectations as to what your successor, Joseph Otting, will be focused on at the OCC?
As he said in his confirmation hearing, The Responsible Innovation initiative is really to make the national bank system cutting edge and to make it serve communities and businesses' credit needs, so I think there's an openness to rethinking structural things. I think fintech has the opportunity to reduce costs for the banks that he supervises and also part of the mission for the OCC is to make sure consumers are served. I think fintech has an enormous potential to bring unbanked or underbanked people into mainstream financial services.
What's your take on how Keith Noreika, who served as acting comptroller after your departure, led the OCC in the interim?
I'm going to follow the lead on my predecessors and really not comment on the successors' initiatives or steps. The only thing I will say is the OCC really has an important mission, which is to preserve the safety and soundness of the national bank system. That really requires a credible supervisory approach, and I'm confident that is something the OCC will do.
What about Noreika's comments about how the mix of commerce and banking might not be the worst idea?
I'm not going to comment on that.
In what other ways do you plan to work to improve the banking and financial services industry?
I think this was a theme I tried to emphasize throughout my career, but there's really a need to demystify the regulatory framework to both management and boards of directors. I hope that I can provide that to financial institutions.
Banking is highly regulated. As comptroller, I would use public speaking opportunities to identify emerging issues that banks should think about before the examiner showed up on the doorstep. That's also what drove a lot of the guidance that was issued.
As someone who has overseen state and federal banking, do you think there are ways that the OCC and Conference of State Bank Supervisors can better work together?
I think 90 percent of the time they do work well together. Justice Louis Brandeis co-founded Nutter. He's famous for calling the states “laboratories for change.” The fintech initiatives and the Responsible Innovation initiatives at the OCC really are a live example of a laboratory of change. Aside from the litigation, which I think is unfortunate, it has pushed the states to rethink the multistate licensing and supervision process they have trying to streamline it to be more cooperative on an interstate basis.
The OCC was created by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863 for a reason: to create the national framework for banking to benefit the economy. Fast-forward to the 21st century, I think the fintech firms are looking for the same type of national footprint to operate under.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
Trump’s DOE Pick Could Spell Trouble for Title IX Enforcement, Higher Ed Funding
4 minute readWhen Police Destroy Property, Is It a 'Taking'? Maybe So, Say Sotomayor, Gorsuch
Trending Stories
- 1From 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Rollercoaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
- 2Critical Mass With Law.com’s Amanda Bronstad: Why Jurors in California Failed to Reach Verdict Over Zantac, Bankruptcy Judge Tables Sanctions Against Beasley Allen Attorney
- 3Jones Day Client Seeks Indemnification for $7.2M Privacy Settlement, Plus Defense Costs
- 4Elections Have Consequences: Some Thoughts on Labor and Employment Law Topics in 2025 and Beyond
- 5Law Firm Associates, Staffers Continue to Put a Premium On Workplace Flexibility, Study Finds
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250