Galaxy Digital Files for National Trust Bank Charter to Expand Client Services

Galaxy Digital’s application for a national trust bank charter would bring fiduciary investment advice closer to the custody, trading and staking services it already offers. The plan hinges on approval of an application filed by subsidiary Galaxy Digital LP, and would place the proposed Galaxy National Bank under the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).

If approved, the institution would serve clients across the United States under one federal framework. Galaxy says the charter would let it bring more services within that structure; the application itself does not establish that the bank will open or specify when a decision might come.

What Galaxy wants to bring together

The proposed trust bank would offer fiduciary investment advisory services alongside Galaxy’s digital asset custody, trading and staking. That combination is the central business rationale: clients could access several services through an institution organized around trust activities, while Galaxy would operate within a single federal framework if its application succeeds.

The filing would build on an existing, geographically broad set of permissions. Galaxy says it holds more than 50 licenses across the United States, Europe and Asia. Its existing businesses include broker-dealer subsidiaries registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission and members of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority; a subsidiary registered as a swap dealer with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; a U.K. subsidiary authorized by the Financial Conduct Authority; and a subsidiary holding a BitLicense and a Money Transmission License from the New York State Department of Financial Services.

Those credentials show that Galaxy already works across several financial activities and jurisdictions. A national trust bank charter could give the company another operating structure, but it would not make the existing licenses interchangeable or resolve the application’s outcome. The stated plan is specific to the proposed trust institution and its intended mix of services.

A broader push for digital asset charters

Galaxy’s filing arrives amid increased interest in national trust bank charters among cryptocurrency firms and financial companies exploring crypto services. The appeal, as described in recent industry coverage, is that a trust institution can support custody and tokenization without taking deposits. That distinction shapes the business model: custody and related services can be pursued within a narrower institutional role than the one associated with deposit-taking banks.

The volume of applications has risen. The OCC received 14 applications for new charters during 2025, nearly matching the total it received over the preceding four years combined. In the 90 days ending Aug. 24, the agency made nine significant charter determinations: six preliminary conditional approvals, one final approval and two denials. Four of the six conditional approvals went to companies building digital asset infrastructure.

Those figures point to active competition for a federally supervised structure, while also showing that outcomes vary. Conditional approval is not the same as final approval, and the record cited here includes both approvals and denials. For Galaxy, the key near-term fact is that the application has been submitted; the information provided does not indicate a decision.

What approval could mean for clients

Galaxy founder and CEO Mike Novogratz said digital assets are becoming more important to the global financial system and that the company has spent years building capabilities to support that shift. He described a national trust charter as a next step that could consolidate more services within one federal framework and widen the ways Galaxy serves clients as adoption grows.

For clients, the potential change is about access and institutional structure. A single trust bank could connect advisory work with custody, trading and staking services in one setting. Whether that arrangement proves useful will depend on the final scope of the institution, the services it actually offers and how clients choose to use them. The application does not provide details on pricing, client eligibility or launch timing.

There is a recent example in the same sector, though the companies’ applications and outcomes should be considered separately. Ripple said on Oct. 26 that the OCC had given final approval for Ripple National Trust Bank’s charter. That decision illustrates that a digital asset firm can reach a final approval stage; it does not determine Galaxy’s result.

The practical measure to watch is whether Galaxy’s proposed institution receives approval and what activities it is ultimately permitted to conduct. Until then, the filing signals an effort to consolidate services and extend the company’s reach, while the business impact remains contingent on the application’s outcome and the bank’s eventual operating scope.