On November 10, 2025, the IRS issued Rev. Proc. 2025-31 (the Rev Proc.), which provides a safe harbor for investment trusts and grantor trusts to stake certain digital assets without jeopardizing their status as trusts for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The Rev. Proc. comes in response to the White House’s request made in July 2025 for published guidance on this topic.[1]

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Troutman Pepper Locke advised Piper Sandler & Co., a leading investment bank, as sole placement agent in Univest Financial Corporation’s $50 million private placement of fixed-to-floating rate subordinated notes. For more information, see the press release.

On November 5, the Federal Reserve Board announced that it had finalized revisions to its Large Financial Institution (LFI) rating system and the Insurance Supervisory Framework that change when a firm is considered “well managed” and recalibrated the enforcement stance tied to weaker component ratings. Under the new approach, a firm with at least two component ratings of Broadly Meets Expectations or Conditionally Meets Expectations and no more than one Deficient-1 will be deemed “well managed.” The Board also replaces the automatic presumption of an enforcement action for one or more Deficient-1 ratings with a case-by-case determination, while retaining a presumption of formal action for any Deficient-2. The Insurance Supervisory Framework was updated to remove a reference to reputational risk. The changes become effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. Governor Michael Barr dissented, warning the rule lowers safeguards and conflicts with statutory “well managed” requirements.

At The Clearing House Annual Conference, Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould outlined an agency-wide strategy to defend and promote federal preemption across the banking system. As reported by Law360, he emphasized pairing court advocacy with public- and policymaker-facing engagement to rebuild political support that he said has eroded over the past 15 years.

Monday, November 10, 2025

Register Here

James Stevens, partner and co-leader of Troutman Pepper Locke’s Financial Services Industry Group, will present “Bank Partnerships and Banking‑as‑a‑Service: New Pressure and New Opportunities” at Practising Law Institute’s Banking Law Institute 2025 on Monday, November 10, 2025. This daylong advanced-level CLE program will cover recent developments impacting the

Register Here
November 12 – 14, 2025

Members of Troutman Pepper Locke’s Financial Services Industry Group are set to speak at the upcoming Third Party Payment Processor’s Annual Conference, “Solving the Payment Puzzle.” This event offers attendees valuable insights into the latest developments in payments and compliance.

Thursday, November 6 • 8:30 a.m. – 3:30 p.m. ET

Register Here

Troutman Pepper Locke is proud to sponsor the Community Bankers Association of Georgia’ 2025 Tech Talk – North conference, being held on November 6 in Atlanta, Georgia. James Stevens, co-leader of Troutman Pepper Locke’s Financial Services Industry Group, will be presenting on Regulatory

When a tenant in a shopping center files for bankruptcy, Section 365(b)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code provides special protections for landlords that go beyond those available for other commercial leases. These protections require any potential assignee of a shopping center lease to comply with exclusivity and use provisions, maintain the existing tenant mix, and meet financial standards similar to the original tenant. As a result, landlords can block assignments to undesirable tenants, but buyers must carefully review lease terms and co-tenant agreements before bidding on a debtor’s lease.

Last May, we provided a client alert about a recent federal district court case (Spence v. American Airlines, No. 4:23-cv-00552-O, 2025 WL 225127, at *2 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 10, 2025)), in which a plan sponsor and certain plan fiduciaries were found to have breached their ERISA fiduciary duty of loyalty based primarily on conduct related to proxy voting of securities held in certain of the 401(k) plans’ investment funds. At that time, the court left open the question of whether the breach resulted in any damages to the participants.