State law preemption standards for national banks and subsidiaries clarified
12 U.S.C. § 25b
in effect(a) DefinitionsFor purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:(1) National bankThe term “national bank” includes—(A) any bank organized under the laws of the United States; and (B) any Federal branch established in accordance with the International Banking Act of 1978 [12 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.]. (2) State consumer financial lawsThe term “State consumer financial law” means a State law that does not directly or indirectly discriminate against national banks and that directly and specifically regulates the manner, content, or terms and conditions of any financial transaction (as may be authorized for national banks to engage in), or any account related thereto, with respect to a consumer. (3) Other definitionsThe terms “affiliate”, “subsidiary”, “includes”, and “including” have the same meanings as in section 1813 of this title.
(b) Preemption standard(1) In generalState consumer financial laws are preempted, only if—(A) application of a State consumer financial law would have a discriminatory effect on national banks, in comparison with the effect of the law on a bank chartered by that State; (B) in accordance with the legal standard for preemption in the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Barnett Bank of Marion County, N. A. v. Nelson, Florida Insurance Commissioner, et al., 517 U.S. 25 (1996), the State consumer financial law prevents or significantly interferes with the exercise by the national bank of its powers; and any preemption determination under this subparagraph may be made by a court, or by regulation or order of the Comptroller of the Currency on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with applicable law; or (C) the State consumer financial law is preempted by a provision of Federal law other than title 62 of the Revised Statutes. (2) Savings clauseTitle 62 of the Revised Statutes and section 371 of this title do not preempt, annul, or affect the applicability of any State law to any subsidiary or affiliate of a national bank (other than a subsidiary or affiliate that is chartered as a national bank). (3) Case-by-case basis(A) DefinitionAs used in this section the term “case-by-case basis” refers to a determination pursuant to this section made by the Comptroller concerning the impact of a particular State consumer financial law on any national bank that is subject to that law, or the law of any other State with substantively equivalent terms. (B) ConsultationWhen making a determination on a case-by-case basis that a State consumer financial law of another State has substantively equivalent terms as one that the Comptroller is preempting, the Comptroller shall first consult with the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection and shall take the views of the Bureau into account when making the determination. (4) Rule of constructionTitle 62 of the Revised Statutes does not occupy the field in any area of State law. (5) Standards of review(A) PreemptionA court reviewing any determinations made by the Comptroller regarding preemption of a State law by title 62 of the Revised Statutes or section 371 of this title shall assess the validity of such determinations, depending upon the thoroughness evident in the consideration of the agency, the validity of the reasoning of the agency, the consistency with other valid determinations made by the agency, and other factors which the court finds persuasive and relevant to its decision. (B) Savings clauseExcept as provided in subparagraph (A), nothing in this section shall affect the deference that a court may afford to the Comptroller in making determinations regarding the meaning or interpretation of title LXII of the Revised Statutes of the United States or other Federal laws. (6) Comptroller determination not delegableAny regulation, order, or determination made by the Comptroller of the Currency under paragraph (1)(B) shall be made by the Comptroller, and shall not be delegable to another officer or employee of the Comptroller of the Currency.
(c) Substantial evidenceNo regulation or order of the Comptroller of the Currency prescribed under subsection (b)(1)(B), shall be interpreted or applied so as to invalidate, or otherwise declare inapplicable to a national bank, the provision of the State consumer financial law, unless substantial evidence, made on the record of the proceeding, supports the specific finding regarding the preemption of such provision in accordance with the legal standard of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Barnett Bank of Marion County, N.A. v. Nelson, Florida Insurance Commissioner, et al., 517 U.S. 25 (1996).
(d) Periodic review of preemption determinations(1) In generalThe Comptroller of the Currency shall periodically conduct a review, through notice and public comment, of each determination that a provision of Federal law preempts a State consumer financial law. The agency shall conduct such review within the 5-year period after prescribing or otherwise issuing such determination, and at least once during each 5-year period thereafter. After conducting the review of, and inspecting the comments made on, the determination, the agency shall publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the decision to continue or rescind the determination or a proposal to amend the determination. Any such notice of a proposal to amend a determination and the subsequent resolution of such proposal shall comply with the procedures set forth in subsections (a) and (b) of section 43 of this title. (2) Reports to CongressAt the time of issuing a review conducted under paragraph (1), the Comptroller of the Currency shall submit a report regarding such review to the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate. The report submitted to the respective committees shall address whether the agency intends to continue, rescind, or propose to amend any determination that a provision of Federal law preempts a State consumer financial law, and the reasons therefor.
(e) Application of State consumer financial law to subsidiaries and affiliatesNotwithstanding any provision of title 62 of the Revised Statutes or section 371 of this title, a State consumer financial law shall apply to a subsidiary or affiliate of a national bank (other than a subsidiary or affiliate that is chartered as a national bank) to the same extent that the State consumer financial law applies to any person, corporation, or other entity subject to such State law.
(f) Preservation of powers related to charging interestNo provision of title 62 of the Revised Statutes shall be construed as altering or otherwise affecting the authority conferred by section 85 of this title for the charging of interest by a national bank at the rate allowed by the laws of the State, territory, or district where the bank is located, including with respect to the meaning of “interest” under such provision.
(g) Transparency of OCC preemption determinationsThe Comptroller of the Currency shall publish and update no less frequently than quarterly, a list of preemption determinations by the Comptroller of the Currency then in effect that identifies the activities and practices covered by each determination and the requirements and constraints determined to be preempted.
(h) Clarification of law applicable to nondepository institution subsidiaries and affiliates of national banks(1) DefinitionsFor purposes of this subsection, the terms “depository institution”, “subsidiary”, and “affiliate” have the same meanings as in section 1813 of this title. (2) Rule of constructionNo provision of title 62 of the Revised Statutes or section 371 of this title shall be construed as preempting, annulling, or affecting the applicability of State law to any subsidiary, affiliate, or agent of a national bank (other than a subsidiary, affiliate, or agent that is chartered as a national bank).
(i) Visitorial powers(1) 11 So in original. No par. (2) has been enacted. In generalIn accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Cuomo v. Clearing House Assn., L. L. C. (129 S. Ct. 2710 (2009)), no provision of title 62 of the Revised Statutes which relates to visitorial powers or otherwise limits or restricts the visitorial authority to which any national bank is subject shall be construed as limiting or restricting the authority of any attorney general (or other chief law enforcement officer) of any State to bring an action against a national bank in a court of appropriate jurisdiction to enforce an applicable law and to seek relief as authorized by such law.
(j) Enforcement actionsThe ability of the Comptroller of the Currency to bring an enforcement action under title 62 of the Revised Statutes or section 45 of title 15 does not preclude any private party from enforcing rights granted under Federal or State law in the courts.
Source: OLRC USLMURL: https://uscode.house.gov/download/releasepoints/us/pl/119/95/xml_usc12@119-95.zipFetched: 6/3/2026