Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Topics
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- Jul 23, 2026Anonymous AnonymousSupportIndividual
The commenter supports the proposed action but urges the OCC to go further by requiring full public disclosure of stablecoin issuer ownership, especially regarding foreign and politically connected interests. They also advocate for public reporting whenever customer funds are frozen and for heightened scrutiny of issuers with potential conflicts of interest.
Read comment → - Jul 17, 2026Nancy LightSupportIndividual
The commenter supports strengthening OCC rules for stablecoin-issuing companies. They advocate for stricter ownership disclosure, enhanced oversight for leadership with political ties, and public accounting for frozen assets.
Read comment → - Jul 15, 2026Anonymous AnonymousOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes the proposed enforcement carve-outs and consultation framework, arguing they provide structural protection for politically connected banks with foreign ownership. They also request that the OCC require public records and numbers whenever a company uses its ability to freeze funds.
Read comment → - Jul 12, 2026A TSupportIndividual
The commenter supports the proposed rule but urges the OCC to adopt even more stringent standards for transparency, governance, and accountability. They specifically recommend requirements for beneficial ownership disclosure, enhanced review for political/foreign influence, reporting on asset freezes, and clear enforcement guidelines.
Read comment → - Jul 7, 2026Anonymous AnonymousSupportIndividualRead comment →
