For the first time in American history, a sitting president is asking a federal bank regulator to give his private cryptocurrency company the implicit backing of the U.S. government.

"For the first time in history, a president is leaning on a bank regulator to give his private enterprise the implicit backing of the federal government. It is outrageous."

— Corey Frayer, director of investor protection at the Consumer Federation of America

Critics expressed alarm on Tuesday following a report from NOTUS that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is expected to approve a national trust bank charter for World Liberty Financial in the coming weeks. The crypto startup was founded by members of the Trump family, along with the family of Trump Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.

If the charter is granted, World Liberty Financial would receive what NOTUS described as "significant legal and financial benefits." Among them: the ability to settle financial transactions on its platform "akin to Venmo or PayPal," through which the Trump family would receive a cut of every transaction.

Translation: the federal government is about to put its seal of approval on a payment processing system owned by the man who signs the checks.

World Liberty Financial has been in operation since 2024. According to NOTUS reporter Jeff Stein, Trump has reported personally earning $57 million from the company, and that number is projected to climb significantly if the charter goes through. Forbes estimated last month that Trump's total wealth has nearly tripled since returning to office, growing from $2.3 billion in 2024 to $6.5 billion in 2026.

The company has also attracted massive investments from foreign governments, raising additional questions about who exactly stands to profit from a federal banking charter for a firm whose entire brand revolves around its association with the president.

David Wachsman, a spokesperson for World Liberty Financial, dismissed concerns about conflicts of interest. He told NOTUS that "none of the company's leadership or employees work for the US government," despite the fact that the president and his entire family stand to personally profit from the charter's approval.

Derek Martin, vice president at Focal Point Strategy Group, saw through the distinction. He wrote on X that there was "no other way to interpret" the NOTUS report "than Trump using the government to advance his own firm's interests."

"World Liberty Financial's entire brand, and reason for existence, basically, is 'We are affiliated with Trump,'" Martin added. "This is just the latest way they are leveraging it."

The charter would be approved by the OCC, which reports to the Treasury Department, which answers to Trump. The comptroller of the currency was personally appointed by Trump. At every level of the chain of command, the same person benefits.

Corey Frayer, director of investor protection at the Consumer Federation of America, told NOTUS there was simply no precedent for a sitting president being granted such privileges for a company he founded by a comptroller whom he personally appointed.

Diana Henriques, a veteran financial journalist best known for her extensive coverage of the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme, expressed horror at the prospect. "The guardrails continue to fall," she wrote on Bluesky. "It is functionally impossible to regulate a bank owned by the president. Yet it can imperil the entire banking system if it runs off the rails."

Government watchdogs have been raising alarms about Trump's cryptocurrency firm for months. The company's trajectory reads like a master class in regulatory capture: a president appoints a bank regulator, then asks that regulator to approve a charter for his own company, which would then gain access to the federal payment infrastructure used by millions of Americans.

The implicit promise of a federal banking charter is that the institution behind it is safe, sound, and properly supervised. When the institution in question is a crypto startup whose primary competitive advantage is a name sharing DNA with the White House, the safety net looks less like regulation and more like a subsidy.

Henriques put it bluntly: "For heaven's sake, this has to be stopped."

The question is not whether the guardrails have fallen. They have. The question is whether anyone is left watching the track.