The Strategic Imperative

Bank-Fintech partnerships are no longer just a trend; they are an economic imperative born from mutual necessity. Banks hold the "keys to the kingdom" (the regulatory charter) but often lack the digital agility to acquire modern customers efficiently. Fintechs possess that agility and innovation but hit a hard "regulatory ceiling" without a banking partner. By joining forces, they negate these individual deficiencies: the bank gains instant access to new markets and technology, while the fintech secures the critical regulatory infrastructure needed to go to market. This symbiosis allows both parties to scale, turning potential competitors into powerful allies.

The Reality: An Extension of the Bank

However, while this symbiosis offers immense benefits, it comes with a strict condition. When a fintech partners with a bank, it ceases to be an external vendor. In the eyes of regulators and the law, the fintech becomes a functional extension of the bank.

Since fintech utilizes the bank's charter to operate, the distinction between the technology provider and the regulated institution blurs. Any action taken by the fintech, whether it is a marketing campaign, a credit decision, or a data handling practice, is a direct reflection on the bank.

The stakes are incredibly high. If a partner fails to adhere to compliance standards or suffers a collapse, the consequences do not stop at the fintech’s door. They cascade directly to the bank in the form of enforcement actions, civil money penalties, and long-term reputational damage.

The Regulatory Landscape: Beyond BSA

A common misconception in the industry is that due diligence is primarily an Anti-Money Laundering (BSA/AML) exercise. While BSA is critical, it is only one component of a much broader regulatory obligation.

Financial Institutions are subject to a vast array of federal statutes. As outlined in the OCC’s Supervision of Community Bank guidelines, banks must adhere to strict consumer protection laws. When a fintech partners with a bank, they must demonstrate the capability to comply with these same obligations, including:

• Truth in Lending Act (TILA): Ensuring accurate disclosure of credit terms.
• Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA / Reg E): Managing consumer rights in electronic payments.
• Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA): Handling consumer data responsibly.
• Fair Lending Statutes: preventing discriminatory practices in underwriting.
• Regulation CC (Expedited Funds Availability Act): Governing the availability of funds and the collection of checks.
• Regulation P: Governing the privacy of consumer financial information.
• Regulation G: Pertaining to the disclosure and reporting of CRA-related agreements.
• Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices (UDAAP): Ensuring marketing and product design are fair.

Crucially, although the fintech utilizes the bank's charter for the program, the fintech itself is typically not a licensed bank. This means their specific role in the flow of funds must be scrutinized to ensure it aligns with money transmission regulations, particularly at the state level. If a bank partners with a fintech that cannot fulfill all these obligations, the bank is effectively driving blind into dangerous regulatory territory.

The Necessity of Assurance

Because the bank bears the ultimate risk, it needs absolute confidence that its partner can operate successfully within the tight contours of the regulatory mesh the bank navigates daily. This confidence cannot be derived from pitch decks or high-level presentations; it must be fortified in tangible policy statements and defined procedures that demonstrate a maturity beyond simple intent.

This assurance extends beyond basic compliance. The bank must validate two fundamental pillars of the partnership:

1. Operational Capability: The bank needs certainty that the fintech possesses not just the theory, but the actual machinery to execute its obligations. This means verifying that their policies are backed by sufficient resources, clear workflows, and robust controls.
2. Bona Fide Status: The bank must confirm that it is dealing with a legitimate, stable entity. This goes beyond checking the corporate registration; it involves digging into the financial stability of the partner to ensure they are a going concern, and verifying that there are no "bad actors" or hidden risks in the ownership structure.

Due diligence serves as the primary mechanism for the bank to obtain this assurance. It is the rigorous process through which the bank moves from trusting the partner's vision to verifying their reality.

The Statutory Guide: Interagency & OCC Guidelines

The critical importance of due diligence is not merely a best practice; it is a regulatory expectation formally reinforced in the Interagency Guidance on Third-Party Relationships: Risk Management. This comprehensive guidance establishes a framework for managing risks throughout the entire lifecycle of a relationship, from planning and due diligence to contract negotiation, ongoing monitoring, and termination. While the document serves as a generic standard for any third-party engagement, its core tenet is absolute: a bank’s use of third parties does not diminish its responsibility to operate in a safe and sound manner and to comply with applicable laws and regulations.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) took these broad principles and made them specifically applicable to fintech partnerships by issuing "Conducting Due Diligence on Financial Technology Companies: A Guide for Community Banks." This guide moves beyond general vendor management to address the unique complexities of fintech business models. It mandates that banks look beyond the surface and conduct a deep-dive assessment into six specific areas:

1. Business Experience & Qualifications:

• Considerations: Evaluating the fintech’s strategic goals, the background of its board and management, and its track record in the industry to ensure cultural and strategic alignment.

2. Financial Condition:

• Considerations: Assessing audited financial statements, funding sources, and burn rates to verify the company’s sustainability and ability to remain a going concern.

3. Legal & Regulatory Compliance:

• Considerations: Verifying licensure (state money transmission), evaluating the Compliance Management System (CMS), and reviewing any history of consumer complaints or legal actions.

4. Risk Management & Controls:

• Considerations: scrutinizing internal policies, internal audit functions, and the overall control environment to ensure they meet bank-grade standards.

5. Operational Resilience:

• Considerations: Assessing business continuity plans, disaster recovery protocols, and incident response capabilities to ensure service availability during disruptions.

The Dichotomy: Essential but Burdensome

For the bank, robust due diligence is the non-negotiable firewall that protects its charter, its reputation, and its financial stability. It is the internal control that ensures "innovation" does not become "violation," and regulatory examiners expect this process to be exhaustive. However, operationalizing this necessity creates a severe dichotomy: the very process designed to protect the bank effectively paralyzes its ability to grow.

The sheer logistics of a compliant onboarding process are staggering. It involves the coordination of multiple stakeholders and the collection of hundreds of distinct documents, from audited financials and strategic plans to specific sub-policies on dispute resolution and information security. For compliance teams, which are often lean operations at community banks, this becomes an all-consuming manual grind.

Highly skilled risk officers find themselves forced into the role of administrative chasers, spending hundreds of hours tracking email threads, managing version control in spreadsheets, and nagging partners for missing files—rather than focusing on high-level risk analysis. This inefficiency creates a massive resource drain. A standard due diligence cycle for a single fintech partner often drags on for 3 to 6 months, incurring significant overhead costs and delaying revenue generation. The bank is left choosing between stalling its strategic progress to stay safe or stretching its resources to the breaking point.

How Across Bridges the Gap

The solution is not to cut corners, but to upgrade the engine. Across helps Financial Institutions resolve this dichotomy by transforming the due diligence process from a manual burden into a streamlined, analytical advantage.

• Comprehensive Coverage: Our risk assessment framework covers 14 distinct risk categories, fully encompassing the six core areas specified in the OCC guidelines and expanding into deeper operational nuances.
• Speed & Efficiency: By utilizing standardized SOPs and a team of expert analysts, Across reduces the assessment timeline from months to just 2 weeks.
• Actionable Intelligence: We do not just collect documents. We provide the bank with a "Ready-to-Use" Risk Assessment Report, complete with detailed findings (Observations and Recommendations) and a clear risk score.

This allows the bank to satisfy its regulatory obligations and gain the necessary assurance without stalling its strategic objectives. With Across, the road to fintech onboarding is no longer a bottleneck; it is a secure, high-speed lane to growth.

‍