FR UU Reporting: The Fed’s New Stablecoin Collection and FR Q Changes

The Federal Reserve Board’s proposal to implement the GENIUS Act, published in the Federal Register on 29 September 2026 under Docket No. R-1899, carries a Paperwork Reduction Act section that creates a new information collection, FR UU, and widens the respondent scope of two existing ones, FR Q and FR Q-2. Comments on the collections and on the rule itself are due by 30 November 2026. FR UU reporting is where the proposal’s supervisory design turns into filing duties: a monthly reserve report certified by the chief executive and chief financial officers, a 24-hour notice when one-to-one backing fails, a capital plan five business days after a quarter-end shortfall, and an annual anti-money laundering certification from the board of directors.

For FR Q (OMB No. 7100-0313) and FR Q-2 (OMB No. 7100-0314) the change is narrower. Every existing reporting, recordkeeping and disclosure requirement stays as it is; the notice adds Board-supervised permitted payment stablecoin issuers (PPSIs) to the respondent population because the proposal would run a PPSI’s non-reserve assets through Regulation Q. The Board estimates one additional respondent for each collection.

The initial notice is the stage at which the Board’s burden estimates are open to challenge, and those estimates show what the Board has itemised and what it has left out. The confidential weekly report and the quarterly report of financial condition that the same proposal would require do not appear in the FR UU burden list at all.

Related reading: EBA-NYDFS Stablecoin MoU: What EU EMT Issuers Should Know

FR UU reporting dates: from the GENIUS Act to the 30 November comment deadline

• 18 July 2025: the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (GENIUS Act, 12 U.S.C. 5901 et seq.) is enacted.
• 24 September 2026: the Board announces two requests for comment, one on the regulatory framework for Board-supervised PPSIs and one on the application process for banks seeking to issue payment stablecoins through a subsidiary.
• 29 September 2026: both notices are published in the Federal Register, the framework as FR Doc. 2026-19860 (91 FR 61580, Docket R-1899, RIN 7100-AH29) and the application procedures as FR Doc. 2026-19899 (Docket R-1900, RIN 7100-AH30).
• 30 November 2026: comments close on both dockets.
• 18 January 2027: 18 months after enactment. The Act’s effective date is the earlier of that date or 120 days after the primary Federal payment stablecoin regulators issue any final regulations implementing the Act.
• 18 July 2028: subject to the exceptions in 12 U.S.C. 5902(c) and 5916, the prohibition on digital asset service providers offering or selling a payment stablecoin to a person in the United States unless it is issued by a PPSI begins under 12 U.S.C. 5902(b)(1).

The Board’s page listing information collections out for public comment shows the two dockets as separate rows, one for FR UU with FR Q and FR Q-2 (R-1899) and one for FR UU with FR 2081a/b/c (R-1900), each with a comment period ending 30 November 2026. Neither row has an OMB supporting statement, a draft reporting form or draft reporting instructions attached, and neither yet shows a final Federal Register notice.

Three identifiers under one docket, and FR UU appears twice

The Board reviewed the proposal under authority delegated to it by the Office of Management and Budget, and the notice names three collections. FR UU, titled Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Disclosure Requirements Associated with Regulation UU, is new and carries the placeholder OMB number 7100-NEW. FR Q, the Regulation Q collection, and FR Q-2, the market risk capital rule collection, would each be revised and extended for three years.

FR UU names a set of obligations in rule text, not a template. The collection comprises the information requirements of proposed Regulation UU, which would be codified at 12 CFR part 247. Most of those requirements are met by publishing something on a website, keeping a record, or sending a letter to the Board. The only line-item template in the notice is Table 1 to proposed section 247.11(d), the monthly reserve composition template, with numbered rows for outstanding payment stablecoins and each category of reserve asset; no other FR UU item comes with a schedule.

The identifier also appears in the companion application-procedures notice. There, FR UU covers the information an insured state member bank would submit when it applies for Board approval for a subsidiary to issue payment stablecoins: an application by letter with a business plan, financial information, relevant policies, procedures, terms and agreements, capital-structure documentation in certain circumstances, biographical reports and certifications about certain felony offences. It also covers waiver requests and the material an applicant would submit to appeal a denial. The Board estimates that part at 405 hours a year, built on five applicants at 80 hours each under proposed sections 247.30(b) and (c) and one appeal at five hours under sections 247.31(a) and (b).

The same companion notice revises the FR 2081a, b and c collection (OMB No. 7100-0134) so that the FR 2081c Interagency Biographical and Financial Report is also used for these stablecoin subsidiary applications. FR UU’s burden therefore sits in two dockets with two separate figures, 10,338 hours in R-1899 and 405 hours in R-1900. A burden comment is easier for the Board to act on when it names the docket whose figure it disputes.

Who FR UU reaches beyond the issuers themselves

The core respondent is the Board-supervised PPSI. The proposal defines it as a PPSI supervised and regulated by the Board under the GENIUS Act, covering two groups: subsidiaries of insured state member banks that the Board has approved to issue payment stablecoins, and state-qualified PPSIs that are uninsured state-chartered depository institutions and have transitioned to the Board’s framework under section 4(d) of the Act and proposed section 247.51. The definition excludes PPSIs over which the Board has only backup enforcement authority in unusual and exigent circumstances, and PPSIs that are subject only to the Board’s tying rules.

The respondents line in the PRA section reads “permitted payment stablecoin issuers, covered custodians, and other companies”. That wider population comes from three places in the proposal:

• Tying. Subpart E would apply the GENIUS Act’s tying prohibition to all PPSIs, whatever their primary regulator, and to certain companies unanimously approved by the Stablecoin Certification Review Committee. An entity seeking an exception would submit a request to the Secretary of the Board under proposed section 247.41(c), with a description of the arrangement, its contract terms, any customer benefits and how it would not be contrary to the Act’s purpose. The Board assumes five firms would seek an exception.
• State-qualified issuers. A state-qualified PPSI or institution-affiliated party subject to a Board directive under proposed section 247.50 could object in writing; if the Board does not affirm, modify or rescind the directive within 10 days of receiving the response, the directive lapses automatically. Covered PPSIs above $10 billion in outstanding issuance face the notice and waiver steps in proposed section 247.51.
• Custody. Subpart C would impose separate-accounting and asset-protection duties on covered custodians, a list that runs from state member banks and Board-supervised PPSIs to bank and savings and loan holding companies, the U.S. operations of foreign banking organizations, and Edge and agreement corporations. The Board assumes 20 such entities.

One boundary in the custody estimate is easy to miss. Because acceptance of cash represented by deposit liabilities is excepted from the substantive requirements of subpart C, an insured state member bank that holds PPSI reserves as principal in a deposit relationship would not be a covered custodian for that activity. The 20-entity estimate reflects the Board’s expectation that firms already significantly engaged in custody would be the ones offering custodial services for reserve assets.

The FR UU reporting items and their clocks

The PRA section itemises reporting, recordkeeping and disclosure requirements with source provisions and estimated hours per response. The reporting items, each with its clock:

• Within 24 hours of failing the one-to-one reserve requirement: a notification to the Board through the PPSI’s Federal Reserve Bank, and a plan describing how the PPSI will return to compliance (proposed section 247.11(f)(1)(i) and (ii)).
• Within five business days after a quarter-end at which minimum capital is not met: a capital plan with a detailed restoration strategy that is feasible for returning to compliance within one quarter (proposed section 247.15(c)).
• Monthly: a certification by the chief executive officer and chief financial officer, or those performing the equivalent functions, as to the accuracy of the reserve composition report (proposed section 247.11(e)(2)). Under section 4(a)(3)(C) of the Act, a person who submits the certification knowing it to be false faces the same criminal penalties as those in 18 U.S.C. 1350(c).
• Not later than 180 days after an application is approved, then annually: a board of directors’ certification that the PPSI has implemented anti-money laundering and economic sanctions compliance programmes reasonably designed to prevent it from facilitating money laundering and the financing of terrorist activities (proposed section 247.14(k)).
• Within 120 days after fiscal year-end, for a Board-supervised PPSI with more than $50 billion in outstanding issuance value that is not subject to reporting under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: audited annual financial statements, with a written late-filing notice due on or before the deadline if any portion will be late (proposed section 247.14(l)(2)(ii) and (l)(3)). A preamble footnote adds that this requirement would not apply to a PPSI whose parent company is a reporting entity, to the extent the PPSI’s information would be reflected in applicable reports.
• For covered PPSIs, meaning state-qualified PPSIs that are uninsured state-chartered depository institutions, once outstanding issuance passes $10 billion: a written notification within five calendar days, a waiver request within 240 days for a PPSI seeking to stay solely under its state regulator, an analysis of current and anticipated capital needs within 270 days, and a notice on compliance with the federal framework that, if the PPSI does not comply, identifies the gaps and the remediation plan and explains why it did not comply within the 360-day transition period (proposed section 247.51(b)(2) to (4) and (d)).
• Event-driven: written materials to rebut the presumption that a remuneration arrangement breaches the remuneration prohibition (proposed section 247.10(c)(4)(iii)), and the change-in-control condition the Board expects to attach to approvals, under which a person seeking control would follow Change in Bank Control Act and Regulation Y procedures as if the PPSI were an insured depository institution.

The monthly reserve report deserves a closer look because its clock is tighter than it first reads. By noon on the last day of each month, the PPSI would publish on its website the composition of its reserves as of noon on the last day of the previous month, in a format substantially similar to Table 1 to proposed section 247.11(d). The report carries the total number of outstanding payment stablecoins and the amount and composition of reserves, including the average tenor and geographic location of custody of each category of reserve instrument. The Board expects disclosing the jurisdiction where reserves are held to be generally sufficient for the location item.

The registered public accounting firm’s examination report must be published at the same time. Data extraction, the accountant’s examination and publication would all have to fit inside the month that follows the as-of date. Question 90 of the notice floats an alternative, publication five days after month-end with the examination 30 days after month-end and disclosure of any discrepancies found, and asks whether the timeliness benefit outweighs the risk of later changes.

Recordkeeping and disclosure inside the same collection

The recordkeeping items read like a control framework. A Board-supervised PPSI would record the fair value of its reserve assets at least once each calendar day at 5:00 p.m. in the time zone of its Federal Reserve Bank (proposed section 247.11(a)(2)), and keep records documenting ownership of and legal entitlement to individual reserve assets. It would maintain internal controls that provide for timely and accurate financial, operational and regulatory reporting, including the reports required under part 247 (proposed section 247.13(a)(1)), an internal audit system (section 247.13(a)(2)), a written information security risk and control framework (section 247.13(b)), a complete set of books and records in English (section 247.14(f)), and a records retention policy (section 247.14(g)). Capital-related records include documentation of the legal review of netting and repo agreements (section 247.17(a)(2)(iii)) and operational loss event data collection processes (section 247.18(c)(1)).

Disclosure items include a public redemption policy under which timely redemption may not exceed two business days after the requested redemption date, fee disclosures with at least seven calendar days’ prior notice of any fee change, the same disclosures inside customer agreements, and, for the over-$50 billion population, publication of the audited financial statements.

Weekly and quarterly reports sit outside the burden table

Proposed section 247.14 contains the proposal’s two recurring data reports to the Board. Section 247.14(h) would require every Board-supervised PPSI to submit, weekly and in the manner and form specified by the Board, a confidential report containing the information requested in the form available on the Board’s public website. The preamble says the Board would likely ask for issuance and redemption, trading volume and reserve assets for each payment stablecoin, including the blockchains the coin is listed on, outstanding issuance value, secondary market activity and price movement, redemption volume and times, and detailed reserve asset information.

Section 247.14(i) would require a quarterly report of financial condition and income within 30 days of the end of the prior quarter, in a standardised format prescribed by the Board. The minimum content is an income statement with gross income, expenses and net income, and a balance sheet showing reserve assets at total fair value, stablecoin liabilities at total outstanding issuance value, capital, changes in equity and any assets under custody. The chief financial officer, or equivalent, would declare the report true and correct, and directors and senior management other than that officer would attest to it by signature. The Board describes the report as mirroring, with adjustments, the Call Report that state member banks file but with substantially less content, and says it intends to publish the information.

Neither section 247.14(h) nor section 247.14(i) appears in the FR UU list of reporting items and hours. The 10,338-hour total, split into 2,706 hours of initial setup and 7,632 hours of ongoing compliance, therefore contains nothing for either report. The notice’s economic analysis does count confidential weekly reporting and quarterly reports of financial condition among the costs of its audit and reporting requirements, so the costs are acknowledged even though the PRA hours leave them out. The notice does not say how the weekly and quarterly forms will be taken through the PRA process.

Two further details tie the quarterly report into capital. Proposed section 247.17(b)(2)(iii) provides that, for Regulation Q compliance, any reference in part 217 to the Call Report, the FR Y-9C or other forms is deemed a reference to the forms submitted under section 247.14(i). And Question 143 asks whether a PPSI whose insured state member bank parent already files a Call Report should also file the quarterly report, whether the report should be attached to the Call Report as an appendix, and whether the reports should be developed on an interagency basis across the federal payment stablecoin regulators.

FR Q and FR Q-2: a new respondent type and unchanged requirements

FR Q covers the reporting, recordkeeping and disclosure requirements in Regulation Q, the Board’s capital rule at 12 CFR part 217, for state member banks, certain bank holding companies, U.S. intermediate holding companies and certain covered savings and loan holding companies. The notice puts the collection at 1,056 respondents and 76,286 annual burden hours, with an estimated change of one respondent and 36 hours. The stated revision is limited to adding Board-supervised PPSIs to the respondent scope, and the notice says the proposal would not modify the FR Q requirements in any way.

FR Q-2 covers the market risk capital rule within Regulation Q, which applies to banking organisations with aggregate trading assets and trading liabilities equal to 10 percent or more of quarter-end total assets or $1 billion or more. The notice puts it at 38 respondents and 37,196 hours, with an estimated change of one respondent and 960 hours, and again limits the revision to respondent scope.

The reason a stablecoin issuer lands in a bank capital collection is in proposed section 247.17(b). Reserve assets would carry PPSI-specific dollar capital requirements in tangible equity. Everything else, the non-reserve assets, would be subject to part 217: a PPSI with a parent state member bank as if it were that parent, and a transitioned state-qualified PPSI as if it were a state member bank. Several adjustments apply:

• Reserve assets held under section 247.11(a)(1) are excluded from standardised total risk-weighted assets, advanced approaches risk-weighted assets, average total consolidated assets, total consolidated assets and total leverage exposure.
• Risk-weighted assets must be calculated under the standardised approach in subpart D of part 217; subpart E is not available.
• Part 217’s operational risk requirements do not apply, because proposed section 247.18 sets a PPSI-specific operational risk charge.
• Tangible equity held against the reserve-asset and operational risk minimums must be designated as excluded tangible equity and deducted from the matching part 217 capital component, so the same capital cannot count twice.

Parent institutions face a separate change that sits outside the three collections. Proposed section 217.22(a)(8) would require a Board-regulated institution that consolidates a PPSI under GAAP to deconsolidate it for regulatory capital purposes and deduct from common equity tier 1 an amount equal to the PPSI’s required minimum capital. The notice seeks comment on two alternative approaches, both of which deduct the PPSI’s undistributed positive retained earnings in place of its required minimum capital. The PRA section lists only FR UU, FR Q and FR Q-2; the FR Y-9C and the Call Report are not among the collections this notice revises, so how the deduction would surface on those reports is not addressed here. Separately, the Board says it is considering whether regulations that set different requirements at different asset thresholds should exclude stablecoin reserves from the asset calculation.

The EU’s trading book treatment, covered in our EU Basel III market risk and FRTB multiplier article, runs on a different test; for FR Q-2 the threshold above is the one that counts.

Custody reporting leans on schedules that already exist

The Board is considering whether to add custody reporting under section 10(d) of the GENIUS Act. For now it proposes to rely on reports covered custodians already file:

• State member banks: the fiduciary and custody items on Schedule RC-T of the Call Report. The Board notes that reporting a private key used to issue a payment stablecoin at a $1.00 book value would be consistent with the Schedule RC-T instructions, unless applicable law sets the fair value methodology.
• Bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies with total consolidated assets of $100 billion or more, or designated as GSIBs: Schedule C, item 3 of the FR Y-15.
• U.S. operations of foreign banking organizations: Schedule J, item 3 of the FR Y-15, or Schedule T of the FFIEC 002.
• State-qualified PPSIs above $10 billion that have transitioned to the federal framework: the quarterly report under proposed section 247.14(i).

The notice also says why that may not be enough. Schedule RC-T does not break down the specific assets under custody, so the Board is considering a separate form carrying total covered assets under custody and total payment stablecoin reserves under custody, with the reserves split by affiliate and third-party clients, by deposit accounts at the custodian and at a third-party depository institution, by balances not covered by FDIC insurance, and by the reserve categories in section 4(a)(1)(A) of the Act. That form is only under consideration: Question 194 asks whether the existing reports are enough, and no such collection appears in the PRA section.

Reading the burden estimate before commenting

The Board is candid about the uncertainty. No Board-supervised PPSIs exist yet, so the 10,338 hours rest on stated assumptions: five Board-supervised PPSIs, one PPSI for any requirement that depends on the issuer’s own choices, 20 covered custodians and five tying-exception requesters. The dollar figure of $768,630 applies a staffing mix of 30 percent office and administrative support at $25 an hour, 45 percent financial managers at $90, 15 percent lawyers at $89 and 10 percent chief executives at $130, taken from Bureau of Labor Statistics wage data.

The per-response figures are where a comment can be specific. The ongoing monthly reserve composition report is budgeted at 3.3 hours as a reporting item and 3.3 hours as a disclosure item, plus 3.3 hours for publishing the accountant’s examination report and 0.7 hours for the CEO and CFO certification. The daily fair value record carries 1.27 hours. At the other end, the written information security framework carries 160 hours, the internal controls and internal audit requirements 80 hours each, and the over-$50 billion audited financial statements 160 hours of disclosure burden plus 40 hours of ongoing reporting.

The notice invites comment on whether the collections are necessary and have practical utility, the accuracy of the estimates and their methodology, ways to improve the quality and clarity of the information, ways to reduce burden including through automated collection, and estimates of start-up and operating costs. A comment framed against those five headings addresses the collection directly. The Board has also tagged many questions with the matching question number in the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s March 2026 GENIUS Act proposal, which helps a firm that already commented there map its earlier positions.

Comments go to Docket No. R-1899 and RIN 7100-AH29 through the Board’s proposals website, which the notice calls the preferred method, by mail or hand delivery to the Board’s Secretary, or by email to publiccomments@frb.gov with the docket number in the subject line. A copy of comments on the collections may also be sent to the OMB desk officer for the federal banking agencies at 725 17th Street NW, #10235, Washington, DC 20503, or by fax to (202) 395-5806. The Board generally posts comments on its website without change and without removing personal, business or confidential information.

What the initial notice does not yet do

An initial PRA notice attached to a proposed rule creates no filing obligation. The notice states the standard PRA condition that the Board may not conduct or sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, a collection that does not display a currently valid OMB control number, and FR UU still carries 7100-NEW. The substantive requirements behind it are proposals too, with the Act’s own effective date set by the formula in the dates block above.

The collections also sit inside a wider federal build-out. The notice lists earlier GENIUS Act proposals from the FDIC, the National Credit Union Administration, the OCC, the Treasury, and OFAC with FinCEN, and it invites comment on where the Board’s framework would differ from the OCC’s, FDIC’s or NCUA’s approaches if implemented as proposed. For comparison with a non-U.S. issuer regime at a similar stage, our Bank of England systemic stablecoin rules article covers the June 2026 UK framework for sterling systemic stablecoins, and our MiCAR e-money token reporting guide sets out the EU reporting layer for euro stablecoins.

Our Form PF reporting guide follows another U.S. filing regime through a postponed compliance date, 1 July 2027 in that case. For FR UU, the column to watch on the Board’s review page is the one for the final Federal Register notice.

Frequently Asked Questions

Our PPSI’s parent is a state member bank that already files a Call Report. Would the PPSI still file its own quarterly report?

As proposed, yes: section 247.14(i) applies to all Board-supervised PPSIs. Question 143 asks whether that duplication should stay, whether the PPSI report should become an appendix to the parent’s Call Report, and whether smaller PPSIs below a threshold should report less often, for example every six months. The final rule will settle it.

We are an OCC-supervised PPSI. Can any part of FR UU touch us?

The tying rules in subpart E would apply to every PPSI regardless of its primary regulator, and an exception request under proposed section 247.41(c) goes to the Secretary of the Board. That request is an FR UU item. The Board-supervised PPSI requirements in subpart B would not apply to an OCC-supervised issuer.

Does keeping securities in custody for a PPSI’s reserves bring our bank into subpart C, even if we also hold its deposits?

The deposit leg is excepted: accepting cash represented by deposit liabilities is carved out of subpart C’s substantive requirements. Subpart C addresses custodial or safekeeping services for payment stablecoin reserves, so safekeeping reserve securities would bring a Board-supervised bank into the covered custodian requirements for that activity, including the separate-accounting and asset-protection duties of proposed section 247.21.

Can a Board-supervised PPSI use internal models for its non-reserve assets?

Proposed section 247.17(b)(2)(iv) requires risk-weighted assets to be calculated under the subpart D standardised approach and bars subpart E. Market risk is less clear: the notice adds a PPSI respondent to FR Q-2, and the market risk capital rule behind that collection requires a banking organisation subject to it to calculate a daily VaR-based measure with one or more internal models, each needing the Board’s prior written approval before use, but the notice does not say how that rule would apply to a PPSI. Question 155 asks about the advantages and disadvantages of an eight percent multiple of subpart D risk weights and of allowing subpart E, and Question 156 asks about simpler alternative methods that are at least as conservative as part 217, possibly subject to supervisory approval.

How would the FR Q-2 market risk threshold be measured for a PPSI whose reserve assets are excluded from total consolidated assets?

The notice does not work through that interaction. The FR Q-2 description states the threshold against quarter-end total assets, while proposed section 247.17(b)(2)(i) excludes reserve assets from total consolidated assets for part 217 purposes. A PPSI with a material trading book relative to its non-reserve balance sheet has a reason to raise the point in a comment.

In a Board-supervised PPSI’s first years, what would its parent deduct under proposed section 217.22(a)(8)?

The deduction equals the PPSI’s required minimum capital. During the de novo period, less than three years after initial approval, proposed section 247.15(b)(2) sets that minimum at the greater of $5 million multiplied by the GDP growth adjustment and the calculated requirement. As an inference from proposed sections 247.15(b)(2) and 217.22(a)(8), the de novo floor would therefore set the deduction for a small new issuer. Question 226 asks whether required minimum capital should also include amounts held under a capital directive or enforcement action.

Are comment letters on the collections kept confidential?

The Board states that comments are generally posted without change, including any confidential or identifying information, and asks commenters not to include information that would not be appropriate for public disclosure.

Related Articles

• EBA-NYDFS Stablecoin MoU: What EU EMT Issuers Should Know: the June 2026 supervisory cooperation agreement between the EBA and New York’s financial regulator on cross-border e-money token oversight.
• BoE Systemic Stablecoin Rules: What UK Issuers and E-Money Firms Must Prepare For: reserve composition, redemption and capital requirements in the Bank of England’s framework for sterling systemic stablecoins.
• Stablecoin Reporting Obligations: MiCAR E-Money Tokens and the PSD3 Shift: the layered EU reporting duties for euro stablecoin issuers under MiCAR, the Electronic Money Directive and PSD3.
• Form PF Reporting: Thresholds, Deadlines and the July 2027 Form Switch: SEC Form PF thresholds, filing deadlines and the postponed compliance date for private fund advisers.
• EU Basel III Market Risk Adjustments: The FRTB Multiplier for Trading Book Capital: the Commission’s temporary multiplier on FRTB own funds requirements in the EU.

Key Takeaways

• 30 November 2026: comments close on Docket R-1899 (framework: FR UU, FR Q, FR Q-2) and Docket R-1900 (applications: FR UU, FR 2081c).
• Price FR UU across both dockets, 10,338 hours plus 405 hours, and dispute each figure under its own docket number.
• Monthly reserve report: data as of noon on the last day of one month, published with the accountant’s examination report by noon on the last day of the next; Question 90 is where to argue for a different sequence.
• Shortest clocks: 24 hours for the one-to-one breach notice and return-to-compliance plan, five calendar days for a covered PPSI’s notice after passing $10 billion in outstanding issuance, and five business days after quarter-end for a capital plan.
• Non-reserve assets run through Regulation Q on the subpart D standardised approach only, with reserve assets stripped out of every capital-ratio denominator.
• Parent banking organisations planning a PPSI subsidiary: the figure to model is the CET1 deduction of the PPSI’s required minimum capital, which for a de novo Board-supervised PPSI starts from the $5 million floor multiplied by the GDP growth adjustment.
• For custody oversight, the Board proposes to rely on existing Schedule RC-T, FR Y-15 and FFIEC 002 reporting for specified covered custodians while it considers whether additional covered-custodian reporting, including a separate stablecoin-specific form, is needed.

Sources and References

• Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Implementing the Federal Reserve Board’s Responsibilities Under the GENIUS Act, notice of proposed rulemaking, Docket No. R-1899, RIN 7100-AH29, 91 FR 61580 (29 September 2026): Federal Register FR Doc. 2026-19860
• Same notice, official PDF (Paperwork Reduction Act section at IV.A): govinfo FR-2026-09-29 2026-19860 (PDF)
• Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Application Procedures for Board-Supervised Insured Depository Institutions Seeking Approval for a Subsidiary To Issue Payment Stablecoins, Docket No. R-1900, RIN 7100-AH30 (29 September 2026): Federal Register FR Doc. 2026-19899
• Same notice, official PDF (Paperwork Reduction Act section): govinfo FR-2026-09-29 2026-19899 (PDF)
• Federal Reserve Board press release, Federal Reserve Board requests public comment on two proposals related to establishing a regulatory framework for Board-supervised payment stablecoin issuers under the GENIUS Act (24 September 2026): federalreserve.gov press release
• Federal Reserve Board, Information Collections Currently under Review (rows for R-1899 and R-1900): federalreserve.gov reporting forms review page
• Federal Reserve Board, proposals and public comment portal named in the notice: federalreserve.gov/apps/proposals
• Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act, 12 U.S.C. 5901 et seq., section 5902(b)(1) and (c) (prohibition on digital asset service providers and safe harbours): 12 U.S.C. 5902 (Legal Information Institute)
• Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Regulation Q market risk capital rule, 12 CFR part 217, subpart F (Risk-Weighted Assets, Market Risk), sections 217.203(c)(1) (prior written Board approval of internal models) and 217.205(a) (daily VaR-based measure using one or more internal models): eCFR 12 CFR part 217, subpart F

Before 30 November: the burden figures worth testing

The Paperwork Reduction Act section is the only part of the GENIUS Act package that prices the Board’s reporting design in hours, and the initial notice is the stage at which those hours can still move. A firm planning a Board-supervised PPSI can set the Board’s 3.3-hour monthly report and 10,338-hour total against its own build estimate, adding the weekly and quarterly reports under sections 247.14(h) and (i) that the total omits. That comparison is the document to file under Docket R-1899 before comments close on 30 November 2026.

Disclaimer: The information on RegReportingDesk.com is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal, regulatory, tax, or compliance advice. Always consult your compliance officer, legal counsel, or the relevant supervisory authority for guidance specific to your institution.