First, ask exactly which part of the service the bank actually provides
"Bank cooperation" may mean nothing more than a corporate operating account; it may also mean custody of client funds, payment accounts, agency collection and payment, or other products. Suppose the stablecoin is controlled and exchanged by the platform, and the bank pays out US dollars only on the platform's instructions; in that case the bank participates in fiat currency transfers, but that does not mean the bank becomes the operator of the stablecoin exchange, nor does it automatically guarantee all of the platform's obligations to its clients. Each segment of the actual service should be set out in writing, to avoid substituting a bank logo for legal analysis.
An account-opening relationship and an agency relationship are not the same thing
Taking the United Kingdom as an example, the FCA's PERG guidance distinguishes between payment institution agents and payment agents of credit institutions such as banks, and the latter are treated differently for agent registration under the payment services regulations. However, this specific regime still presupposes a genuine agency status; it does not mean that any bank client can independently carry on business in its capacity as a bank. Whether crypto asset services are separately regulated, and whether the place where the agent is located recognizes the arrangement, must also be checked further; this cannot be inferred directly from fiat currency agency.
Who bears client losses must be answerable
The cooperation agreement should specify when funds are handed over to the bank, to whom the bank owes the payment obligation, how notice is given when an instruction is refused or delayed, and how the platform refunds clients. If the bank provides only an account to the platform, while the client contract is signed by the platform, clients may need to assert their rights against the platform first. The platform's commitments to the outside world must not exceed the services the bank has agreed to in writing; otherwise the upstream party may be entitled to refuse payment while the downstream obligation has already fallen due, and the funding gap will still fall on the platform.
Mainland banks are also subject to clear restrictions
Yin Fa [2026] No. 42 prohibits financial institutions from providing account, transfer and clearing and settlement services related to virtual currency business. Therefore, the bank cooperation model used in overseas markets cannot be applied directly in the mainland, nor can ordinary trade accounts be used to handle coin-related settlements. In practice, confirmation should be obtained from the bank as to the real business, client types and account use; however, a bank's willingness to provide services cannot replace an independent legal assessment of market access.
Recommended actions
- Require the bank to specify whether it provides an operating account, client fund services or agency payment services, and retain the contractual basis.
- Confirm, segment by segment, the service provider and licence for coin receipt, exchange, fiat currency custody and payment.
- Check the bank's suspension of payment, refusal of instructions and client refund responsibilities against the commitments made to clients, item by item.
Information note: This article provides general information and does not replace legal advice based on specific facts.
References
- FCA Handbook PERG 15.4：Small payment institutions, agents and exempt bodies — UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)
- Notice on Further Preventing and Handling Risks Associated with Virtual Currency and Related Matters (Yin Fa [2026] No. 42) — People's Bank of China and seven other departments
