For example, “[Bank name] is a [national/ state-chartered] bank headquartered in [city, state] with offices in [cities or # of states]. We currently have [$X] in assets and last year made [$X] in loans. We are primarily focused on [retail, commercial, agricultural, etc.] banking and are primarily overseen by [primary regulator].” 

For example,

• “We appreciate the OCC’s leadership on this critical issue and strongly support its timely, decisive action to preserve nationwide regulatory clarity for banks and their hundreds of millions of retail and business customers.”
• “The Interim Final Rule (IFR) and Interim Final Order (IFO) provide critical regulatory certainty that national banks may rely upon to continue to exercise well‑established authorities to collect and receive non‑interest charges and fees, including interchange fees, without improper interference from inconsistent and extraterritorial state laws.”

• Bank-specific examples. Where possible, lead with specific examples of how the IFR (and, where applicable, the IFO) will positively impact your institution and the communities it serves.
• District court’s error. Argue that the OCC’s IFR was warranted because the district court incorrectly concluded that 12 C.F.R. § 7.4002 did not grant national banks the power to receive interchange fees under the default fee schedule set by payment card networks.
• Value of payment cards. Discuss the importance of payment cards to America’s economy and the benefits they bring to consumers and merchants.
  • Discuss the benefits delivered by payment card networks to the U.S. economy and the efficiencies created by having the option to adopt default interchange rates.
  • Explain that choosing to adopt default interchange fee rates set by a payment card networks is a decision made according to sound banking principles.
• Value of strong national bank preemption standard. Discuss the value of a strong national bank preemption standard generally. ABA and allies have covered the subject extensively here, here, here, here, and here.
  • For example:
    • “At stake is more than a single fee. It is the continued integrity of a national banking system that supports economic growth, innovation and access to financial services across the country.”
    • “Congress provided national banks with the necessary operational authorities and appropriate protections from harmful state intervention. And the Supreme Court has since repeatedly recognized that Congress intended national banks’ express powers to be broad, rather than limited, and that national banks’ incidental powers evolve alongside financial innovations and the growing needs of an ever-more-complex American economy.”
    • “By attempting to impose state-specific processing and pricing requirements on infrastructure designed to function uniformly at national scale, the IFPA threatens to fragment the payments system, undermine operational stability, and disrupt consumers and businesses far beyond Illinois.”
    • “A strong national banking system with uniform rules is essential to the national economy. A single national standard provides efficiency and clarity for institutions operating across state lines. Efficiency allows for lower prices and better products and services. Clarity helps customers understand what products and services they are getting.”
    • “The bottom line is that attempts by states to deprive national banks, consumers and businesses of a uniform set of standards and practices is anti-free market, anti-consumer and contrary to the safe and sound operation of national banks. To allow these state practices to stand will undercut the safety of America’s banking system and hurt American businesses and consumers.”
• Value of OCC acting now. Discuss the value provided by the OCC acting now by issuing its interim final rule and order as it is uncertain when the Seventh Circuit will rule and the IFPA becomes effective on July 1, 2026.
  • Briefly discuss the lack of systems and technology necessary to comply with the IFPA’s manual and automatic processes.
  • For example:
    • Card networks are currently incapable of bifurcating transactions as the IFPA would require and cannot reasonably be expected to handle 3x-5x the current transaction processing load as would be necessary if each transaction were subdivided to separately identify purchase price, multiple types of taxes, and any gratuities.
    • The manual process through which merchants could, post-transaction, seek refunds for interchange fees attributable to sales taxes and gratuities is not only ill-defined but so inefficient and cost prohibitive as to be effectively impossible.
• State banks relying on Illinois and Federal “wild card” regulations.
  • Illinois-chartered banks. If your bank is Illinois-chartered, consider discussing the value of OCC’s IFR and IFO in the context of Illinois’s “super wild card” regulations, Illinois Banking Act, 205 ILCS 5/5(11), and Savings Bank Act, 205 ILCS 205/6002(11), which permit Illinois-chartered banks to engage in any activity in which national banks are permitted to engage – which, as a result of the OCC’s IFR, now expressly include the power to charge non-interest charges and fees, including credit and debit card interchange fees that are set by or in consultation with third parties.
• Non-Illinois state-chartered banks. If your bank is state-chartered in a state other than Illinois, consider discussing the value of OCC’s IFR and IFO in the context of Riegle–Neal protections at 12 U.S.C. § 1831a(j)(1)], which provide the laws of a host state apply to out-of-state state-chartered banks only to the extent the laws of the host state apply to national banks.
• IFPA compliance costs.
  • Bank-specific costs. If your bank has identified costs it has already incurred or is likely to incur as a result of the IFPA, lead with specific examples when possible. If your bank has not completed such an analysis, you are still encouraged to address IFPA compliance costs in general terms, e.g. core upgrades, additional compliance headcount, outside counsel fees, etc.
  • IFPA compliance costs already incurred. Discuss the irrecoverable regulatory compliance costs banks have already incurred as a result of the regulatory uncertainty surrounding the IFPA and similar state laws being contemplated around the country.
  • Other, previously anticipated IFPA compliance costs. Discuss the compliance costs and burden your bank was going to undertake before July 1, 2026 to comply with the IIFPA.
    • Describe the nature of potential changes your bank considered to benefits/rewards, acceptance in Illinois, product offerings, etc.
    • Identify burdens that would be imposed on third parties.  For example, some banks were considering making changes to the terms of its agreements with cardholders to reflect the impacts of the IFPA and advance notification that it may be required to make of those changes.
• Compliance costs associated with similar state laws. If your banks operates in another state considering a similar law, consider identifying that state law or bill and describing the similar costs your institution has already incurred or expects to incur in preparing to comply with that legislation.
• Costs to communities. Discuss the potential economic costs to the communities your bank serves, such as consumers’ reduced access to payment systems, lower merchant sales, etc.

End your comment by summarizing your key points and thanking the OCC again for robustly defending national banks against obstructive state overreach.

Signature
Name, Title
Contact information