Nick van Eck (Co-founder & CEO of Agora) explained: what changes when a stablecoin issuer applies for a federal trust bank charter, what this means for AUSD, and why the founder's oft-repeated line—"submitting an application doesn't guarantee you'll get the license"—is the most important practical constraint right now.

Background: Agora has submitted an application to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) for a national trust bank charter, joining the largest wave of crypto banking applications since April 1. AUSD's reserve assets consist of cash, U.S. Treasuries (T-bills), and reverse repos, managed by VanEck and State Street. Agora completed a $50 million Series A round led by Paradigm last summer, while simultaneously ending its previous DeFi incentive phase to strategically pivot toward enterprise payments, B2B settlements, payroll, and white-label issuance services for fintech companies and platforms. This trust charter application is a continuation of that strategic evolution, not a pivot.

Nick further broke down the operational realities of the application process: a full business plan, pro forma financial projections, a four-person compliance team, and a head of marketing hired just two weeks ago. He explained why Agora aims to be the "bare metal infrastructure" for over 50 "stablecoin neobanks," rather than competing with them at the application layer.

He also discussed the capabilities that migrating stablecoin issuance to an "on-shore" framework via channels like Fireblocks, Coinbase, Kraken, Circle Mint, and Cryptio would unlock for AUSD. Meanwhile, he interpreted the GENIUS Act as a clear regulatory signal—"the green light to come home."

The content also covered Agora's collaboration with Erebor on 24/7 settlement, the reserve management mechanisms with VanEck and State Street, and Agora's positioning in the competitive landscape of "becoming one of the top five global stablecoin issuers."

Takeaways:

1. Applying for a federal trust bank charter is fundamentally an upgrade from "issuing stablecoins" to "building financial infrastructure."

It’s not just about compliance; it’s about bringing issuance, custody, and on/off ramps under a single regulatory framework to gain the core capability of issuing and serving clients within the U.S.

2. "Submitting an application doesn't mean you'll get the license" is the biggest real-world constraint at this stage.

Competing for a charter isn’t a technical problem; it’s a comprehensive game of capital, team strength, and regulatory communication ability. The cycle is long and uncertain, making it a classic "game for a few players."

3. The GENIUS Act is essentially the U.S. policy of "co-opting" stablecoins.

The core signal is to encourage issuers to move back to the U.S. from offshore locations (like Bermuda). On-shore issuance will become the mainstream path in the next phase.

4. The stablecoin issuer layer is the profit source of the entire value chain.

Controlling issuance means controlling the distribution of returns, mint/redeem costs, and pricing power. It is the only position with "systematic profit margins."

5. Agora's core strategy: be the "bare metal" infrastructure, not an application-layer neobank.

They choose to be the infrastructure powering 50+ stablecoin neobanks rather than competing in front-end customer acquisition, avoiding the CAC war from the start.

6. The current stablecoin neobank model has structural flaws.

Most players rely on the same on/off ramps and stablecoins (USDC/USDT), lacking product control. They inevitably compete on price and customer acquisition, making it hard to form a moat.

7. Controlling key nodes, rather than full-stack in-house development, is the optimal infrastructure path.

Agora builds only the two long-term moats: "issuance + license." Everything else, like custody and key management, is outsourced to mature third parties, improving efficiency while retaining core control.

8. They deliberately avoid becoming a traditional bank (no taking deposits, no lending).

Their positioning is "stablecoin issuance + digital asset custody," not fractional-reserve lending. This is a completely different path for a financial institution.

9. The biggest pain point for enterprises adopting stablecoins is "system fragmentation."

Currently, they need to integrate with multiple systems—Fireblocks, Coinbase/Kraken, auditing tools, etc.—which is incredibly complex. This is precisely the opportunity for a full-stack platform.

10. The upgrade to AUSD isn't an asset upgrade; it's a platform upgrade.

In the future, users won't just use AUSD; they'll directly use the entire suite of systems Agora provides (faster, cheaper, higher yield, stronger compliance).

11. Onshore issuance is a critical inflection point.

Once they obtain a U.S. trust bank charter, they can directly serve U.S. customers, significantly lowering the barrier for institutional adoption and enhancing trust and compliance.

12. Banks and stablecoins will coexist for the long term, forming a "dual-track system."

Banks handle the fiat track (RTP, Fedwire); stablecoins handle the on-chain track (24/7, global). They are complementary, not substitutes.

13. 24/7 capital mobility is the core advantage of stablecoins.

Compared to the non-real-time settlement of traditional banking systems, stablecoins have a structural advantage in global capital flow efficiency. This is the fundamental driver of adoption.

14. Regulatory complexity itself forms a strong moat.

High capital requirements, strong team thresholds, and lengthy approval processes will lead to a concentration of the issuer layer, creating a "handful of top players."

15. The biggest policy variable: whether stablecoins are allowed to distribute yield.

If allowed, it will significantly boost stablecoin appeal and strengthen the dollar's position; if restricted, it will directly impact the competitiveness of the entire business model.

Host:

Great to see you guys.

Nick van Eck:

Great to see you too.

Host:

I was checking it out yesterday—you were at the New York Stock Exchange. Was that today or yesterday? You were walking around there. How was it?

Nick van Eck:

It was great. The New York Stock Exchange is really beautiful. Most of my interviews there have been between 8:30 and 10:00 AM when it's super busy. The one yesterday was during a much quieter period, the quietest I've ever seen the exchange, but overall it's a fantastic, beautiful venue, so it was a great experience.

Host:

Is there anything you didn't get a chance to say yesterday that you'd like to add here?

Nick van Eck:

I think a lot of yesterday was about how banks are trying to slow down the GENIUS Act. I wish we could have talked more about the opportunity for banks in stablecoins and what we're doing because we're positioning ourselves to seize it. Yesterday was more about why banks are slowing things down, which is intuitive—any new technology that could disrupt their business, they'll want to delay. But there's so much content about the opportunity itself, and banks, along with players like us, should really be leaning into it more actively.

Host:

Let's start with the news you announced last week. You submitted some applications. What exactly are you applying for, and where does this fit into Agora's overall strategy and the current regulatory landscape?

Nick van Eck:

The backdrop is the GENIUS Act, which was passed last year and gave the OCC federal regulatory authority over U.S. stablecoin issuance. We've been working hard to build out our products to support this future vision. We did a lot of preparation in Q1 this year, with the goal of applying for a national trust bank charter. Last Friday, we announced that we submitted our application for Agora National Trust Bank.

If granted, this license will provide us with unified federal oversight (pending approval) and also expand our product capabilities. We've been a stablecoin issuer for almost two years now. The issuer role itself generates a lot of profit margin, which can be leveraged across other parts of the value chain. Our mission has always been to bring enterprises on-chain.

When enterprises consider moving into stablecoins, they typically think about three things:

First, how to access and operate these assets—wallets or custody;

Second, how to transfer between the existing financial system and the on-chain world;

Third, compliance, taxes, auditing—currently, stablecoins aren't always treated as "cash" in many cases, which creates audit issues for companies before GENIUS takes effect.

What we solve currently is the "what asset to use" problem. We believe they should use AUSD because we distribute yield and offer free fiat minting and redemption. In the future, we'll provide a full set of out-of-the-box capabilities, letting businesses move money faster, earn more yield, and build global operations.

Host:

Was this vision there from the start, or did it crystallize more recently?

Nick van Eck:

We've had the vision of owning the full technology stack from day one. The product direction has always been clear; it's just the timing that's shifted. For example, white-label stablecoins were always on the roadmap, but we accelerated them last year due to market hype. However, from a business perspective, it's just a feature, not the platform itself.

The core issuance capability is the platform. We've always been thinking about what else we can build on top of that platform.

Honestly, when I was starting the company, I never thought I'd be applying to be the CEO of a federal bank. The environment was completely different then. The GENIUS Act has moved faster than I expected, which is great because it's unlocking demand early. So, last summer, we decided we needed to be ready for it and started building internally.

Regulatory clarity is incredibly important to us. In the past, companies had to piece together licenses from 50 states (MTLs), plus other regulators like NYDFS. It was very complex. The GENIUS Act will massively accelerate stablecoin adoption. The market is already $300 billion, yet the U.S. still lacks a complete regulatory framework—which is frankly astonishing.

The next year will primarily be a preparation period; the real breakout might be in 2027, 2028.

Host:

You mentioned wanting to be "bare metal." Where did that concept come from?

Nick van Eck:

Over the past month or two, there's been an explosion of stablecoin "neobanks," both B2C and B2B, all mostly using similar tech stacks: wallets, on/off ramps, cards, etc., and then fiercely competing on customer acquisition costs.

Our view is that you have to be the underlying infrastructure to capture the profit margins. These neobanks are all using services like Bridge; they pay 3–5 basis points for on/off ramps and have no control over the core product.

So we decided to build from the stablecoin itself. As an issuer, we are both the asset provider and the natural on/off ramp. AUSD's strategy is to be free, so we avoid the absurd situation where moving money from e.g., Venmo to Bank of America incurs a fee.

We want to strip away the middle layers and reach the customer directly. We focus on being the "metal layer" on key strategic points. Other non-core capabilities can be handled by third parties—custody and key management are already mature fields—but the license must be obtained in-house to control the experience.

Host:

What's the difference between various licenses (like national trust vs. BitLicense)? Why did you choose this path?

Nick van Eck:

Most people think of a bank as taking deposits and making loans (fractional reserve), but that's not our model. We're more like an issuer providing global liquidity and fiat channels.

We don't take deposits or make loans. Mercury, for example, recently got a deposit bank charter; they will take deposits and lend themselves in the future. We only want to do two things: issue stablecoins + custody digital assets.

Other functions, like USD accounts, can be provided through partner banks. An issuer inherently needs a global banking infrastructure, which no one can build from scratch.

Host:

If everything goes according to plan, what changes for AUSD?

Nick van Eck:

The biggest change is the ability to directly serve U.S. customers. Currently, we operate under a Bermuda license. The GENIUS Act is effectively encouraging us to "come home to the U.S."

From day one, we can offer direct minting and redemption for U.S. users.

More importantly, on the product layer:

In the future, enterprises won't just use AUSD; they'll use the entire Agora system—faster, cheaper, higher yield, and safer within the trust bank framework.

Right now, if a U.S. enterprise wants to use stablecoins, they need:

Fireblocks + Coinbase/Kraken/Circle Mint + Cryptio + other tools. The process is incredibly complex.

We want to integrate all of this into a single system. That will be the killer app.

Host:

How did the partnership with Erebor come about?

Nick van Eck:

We met them about a year ago. Issuers hold a lot of deposits, which is very attractive to banks. And both of us are pushing the frontier of capital movement—they work on traditional payment rails (RTP, Fedwire), we work on on-chain rails (Ethereum, Solana, etc.).

Stablecoins need to run 24/7, while the banking system doesn't. Erebor is pushing in that direction, so we are very complementary.

Host:

Is it hard to apply for a federal charter?

Nick van Eck:

Very hard. Compared to getting 50 state MTLs, this is a unified framework, but the bar is incredibly high:

•Management and the board must have experience

•Significant capital is required

•You need a complete business plan and financial projections

•Ongoing communication with regulators is necessary

We have a 4-person compliance team, a full finance team, and we've spent almost nothing on marketing until we hired our first marketing person just two weeks ago.

This is a completely different way of operating compared to a software company.

And I want to be clear: submitting an application does not guarantee approval. We're still pushing through the process.

Host:

From a regulatory perspective, what kind of era are we in?

Nick van Eck:

This is one of the most significant periods in the history of U.S. banking regulation. It will change financial markets, capital markets, and payment systems—not just in the U.S., but globally.

Host:

What do you see as the biggest risk factor?

Nick van Eck:

There's been a lot of discussion about "yield distribution" in the past few months. We believe issuers should be able to distribute yield as freely as possible. This would be highly attractive to global users and would also strengthen the appeal of the U.S. dollar. I hope this point gets handled well in the final rulemaking.

Host:

Any final thoughts to add?

Guest:

We're still in the early stages, but the direction is right, and growth is going to be fast from here.

Nick van Eck:

We'll have more partnerships and discussions ahead.

Host:

Thanks for joining us.

Nick van Eck:

Thank you for the invitation.