Conversation with Top Fintech CEOs

Publishing ideas from the world’s greatest innovators has rubbed off on us here at Open Banker, so today we’re trying something completely different. Next week, the Financial Technology Association is having their annual CEO summit. We took the opportunity to ask some of the CEOs who are coming into town to engage with policymakers a few questions. If you’re interested in digging deeper into the future of financial innovation, make sure to RSVP for FTA’s event here.

What are the most underhyped and overhyped fintech policy priorities?

Sarah Levy, CEO of Betterment: Underhyped: Consumer-permissioned data sharing under Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act is a game-changer. Enabling seamless, secure data portability between financial service providers, not gatekept by the largest banks, will level the playing field and drive innovation while putting power back into consumers’ hands. Yet the rule that will make this vision of open banking a reality is under threat—both in the courts and from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau—and this issue doesn’t command the attention it deserves.

Overhyped: The cryptocurrency regulatory developments have garnered disproportionate buzz. There’s a vocal minority who care about these products, to be sure, but most retail investors do not—and should not—have more than a small allocation to the asset class. And they’re unlikely to fundamentally transform financial inclusion or the core value proposition of digital finance in the way more systemic reforms, like open banking or real-time payments, could.

Sid Jajodia, U.S. CEO, Global Chief Banking Officer of Revolut:  Underhyped: Open Finance–it's so underhyped, and it's unclear if it will go forward. It was part of the CFPB’s agenda under the previous administration, and so its future is still under debate. Fundamentally though, Open Finance is a pro-competition initiative which empowers American consumers and businesses to have more control over their data. It means they can take their data from legacy banks, and share it with innovative new companies who can give them a better deal. Combined with AI, it's going to be a game changer. It really aligns with the administration's aim to use regulation to unlock innovation rather than stifling it, and is a great anti-inflationary tool. It's not yet a priority, but I already see some in Congress looking to make it one.

Overhyped: The Remittance Tax currently being debated in Congress, as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill, is definitely becoming overhyped. Political focus on this has increased in the last few weeks, with both proponents and opponents becoming more vocal.  We oppose it. It will do nothing to reduce illegal immigrants' ability to send money overseas, and raise negligible revenue. It's inconceivable such a tax is imposed effectively in the medium term given how fast technology is evolving. It will only succeed in driving legitimate residents’ remittances underground, making it harder for bad actors to be identified. If adopted it will definitely have very negative consequences for the broader standing of the US as a pro-capital anti-tax jurisdiction. However, my prediction is that even if it is adopted, like most capital controls, it will end up being very short lived.

What is one thing you want policymakers to think about when policymaking in the fintech space or engaging with fintechs?

Sarah Levy (Betterment): Technological progress has been the driving force in lowering costs and expanding access to financial markets. Fintechs often are uniquely willing and able to reach consumers underserved by traditional institutions. Betterment is proof that responsible innovation and strong compliance cultures can go hand in hand. Principles-based, technology-neutral regulation is often preferable to prescriptive, technology-specific regulation because it is more adaptable to the rapid pace of technological change. Engaging early and often with fintechs—especially on supervisory design and rule-making—can help to ensure that policymakers and regulators strike the proper balance between innovation and consumer protection. We’re eager to be partners in that process.

Immad Akhund, Co-founder and CEO of Mercury:  Fintechs are eager partners and want to work collaboratively with regulators. Across the fintech space, companies engage with the regulatory system in different ways. Some interact directly with regulators, while others, like Mercury, operate through partnerships with regulated banks. That model brings important oversight, but it also means we’re sometimes a step removed from the supervisory process. We at Mercury would love to have a chance to work more closely with regulators, to explain and answer questions on how our products work and our risk & compliance practices.

More direct engagement between fintechs and bank regulators would strengthen the system. We welcome opportunities to collaborate, whether through listening sessions, rulemakings, tech sprints, public-private partnerships, or initiatives like the Coalition for Financial Ecosystem Standards (CFES). CFES offers one promising model by giving industry a role in helping define consistent and modernized compliance standards and providing a foundation for responsible, scalable partnerships.

Luke Voiles, CEO of Pipe:  Regulation needs to always consider why a piece of financial innovation is important and the experience of the people it’s helping. For instance, less than four percent of loans from big banks go to small businesses. SMBs don’t need to take out huge amounts of capital, and even if they could, they often get crushed under the bureaucracy of it. Alternative financing models, like merchant cash advances, can help SMBs access capital by fitting how they need to borrow and how payments are made. But it’s much easier for a small business owner to understand a flat cost of capital, rather than an APR. Simple things like disclosure requirements can have huge impacts when you look at the different sizes of businesses you’re serving.

Penny Lee, President and CEO, Financial Technology Association:  There is a growing push to force all fintech companies to be regulated as a traditional insured depository bank, regardless of the activities they engage in, whether they solely facilitate payments, provide access to credit for individuals or small businesses, or power financial infrastructure. But not all entities and activities pose the same risks. A fintech offering budgeting tools shouldn’t be regulated the same way as a traditional bank. Instead, what we need is proportionate and tailored risk-based regulation and oversight that focuses on the nature of a service, the potential impact on consumers, and the scale of operations. Smart regulation should be tailored, proportional, and technology-neutral—not driven by outdated labels or regulatory silos. Additionally, it's equally vital to ensure clarity and consistency within existing regulatory frameworks, as fragmented or overlapping frameworks can inadvertently increase complexity and hinder stable innovation.

Sid Jajodia (Revolut):  Fintechs are not just a part of the financial services ecosystem; they represent where the entire industry is heading. Over time, every bank will need to become a modern fintech in order to stay competitive and relevant. That’s why we believe it's critical to update the way we think about bank charters and fintech regulation. Today’s regulatory framework often forces fintechs to navigate a patchwork of outdated processes and partner-dependent models of communication. We believe there should be a clear, efficient path for fintechs to become fully licensed banks—whether through a national payments charter or a revamped de novo chartering process. Equally important is fostering more open, direct communication between regulators, fintechs, and the banks they partner with. Giving fintechs a real seat at the table—alongside traditional institutions—can lead to smarter, more inclusive policy that strengthens consumer protections while also accelerating innovation. Ultimately, we all share the same goal: building a financial system that is safer, more accessible, and better equipped to meet the needs of today’s consumers.

What is the impact of policy volatility on your business strategy?

Sarah Levy (Betterment):  From SEC and DOL rule shifts to emerging AI and data privacy frameworks, this is unquestionably the most uncertain policy environment in Betterment’s history. Betterment constantly assesses how policy changes will impact our customers and our products. But our mission and status as a fiduciary means that our strategic priorities are always guided by the same fundamental question regardless of which way the regulatory winds happen to be blowing: what is in the best interest of our customers? Combining strategic clarity with agility to make tactical adjustments as needed has never been more important.

Penny Lee (FTA):  From open banking to AI and payment modernization, the pace of policymaking has accelerated. That makes FTA’s mission more essential than ever. Our members seek clear and consistent rules that reflect how consumers and small businesses actually use financial services today, not rules built for a different era. We’re committed to partnering with regulators to ensure the policy environment fosters innovation while protecting the public interest.

Sid Jajodia (Revolut):  The pace of policy changes definitely add a layer of complexity to long-term planning. It’s a bit difficult to chart a clear course for the next fiscal year when the regulatory landscape is shifting beneath your feet. However, fundamentally, local innovations around things like stablecoins and AI are reinforcing a dominant position for the US; it’s a busy, but exciting, time. Rather than seeing policy shifts as a hindrance, we’ve embraced it as a prompt to build more flexibility into our strategy. At Revolut, we’ve adopted a more nimble, 360-degree approach to business planning—constantly reviewing market, regulatory, and operational signals to ensure we’re ready to respond to whatever direction policy may take. It’s made us sharper, more resilient, and more proactive about engaging with regulators and anticipating what’s coming down the road. The upside is that it encourages even more real-time alignment between our product, compliance, and growth teams—something that ultimately strengthens the business.

What are the biggest innovations in our space you see coming in the next 12-18 months? Are policymakers ready for them?

Sarah Levy (Betterment):  Betterment is building with the future in mind. We’re introducing self-directed investing and incorporating AI-powered personalization. We’re watching closely to ensure that AI regulation strikes the proper balance between fostering innovation and protecting consumers. Adopting a technology-neutral policy stance relieves policymakers of the need to accurately predict the future while broadly encouraging experimentation and innovation. Forward-thinking policy will determine whether the next generation of fintech innovation drives equity and access, or ends up hamstrung by legacy rules. Let’s make it the former.

Immad Akhund (Mercury):  AI is advancing quickly across industries, but fintech is moving more cautiously. Financial products are complex, highly regulated, and demand real judgment. You can’t automate your way into trust. AI is already helping fintech teams identify patterns in data, detect and fight fraud, and automate repetitive tasks. It’s freeing people up to focus on deeper, more strategic work. Used well, it’s a powerful tool, not a shortcut. We expect meaningful advancements to emerge in the coming months and years. What’s missing today is a strong feedback loop between fintech builders and regulators. The technology is advancing quickly, but we need to have more dialogue about how to ensure the innovation aligns with broader goals of trust, safety, and long-term resilience to the financial system. We’d welcome that. 

Luke Voiles (Pipe):  I think in fintech, we’re heading into a massive new innovation cycle around SMB lending. The last innovation cycle was around alternative data sources and different approaches to underwriting. Now with embedded finance, we can actually bring that new way of underwriting inside the tools that SMBs are using to manage their businesses. 

It’s going to open up a lot of capital access, especially for small businesses who have largely been invisible to the financial system. I think, from a policy perspective, people are ready for this, but capital access will start to look a little different for these businesses than it has through banks. 

It’s also placing fintechs like Pipe in a position to offer tools like merchant cash advances in a very positive and transparent way, in contrast to how they've been done in the past. So we’ll need to update some of our collective perspective on how these tools can be deployed.

Penny Lee (FTA):  We are on the verge of several major innovations in fintech. First, embedded finance will continue to integrate financial services into everyday life, making it easier to obtain a loan at the point of sale, pay for a purchase through the app, or receive cash back from a retailer. AI-powered decisioning will play an increasingly important role in these services, speeding up approval times and improving outcomes. For businesses, programmable payments that automate payments when specific conditions are met will reduce administrative burdens, expedite essential transactions, and make it easier for businesses to manage their finances. 

Sid Jajodia (Revolut):  One of the most transformative innovations we’re going to see is the rise of agentic AI—AI that’s not just conversational, but actually capable of solving end-to-end customer issues in real time. We’re on the cusp of a major overhaul in how customer service is delivered across all industries, and also particularly in financial services. That doesn’t mean humans are going away; there will always be a critical role for empathy, judgment, and oversight, but AI will drastically improve speed, consistency, and access. There are likely going to be even more disruptive use cases. For example, using AI agents to manage your current account for you, switching funds from one bank to another on a daily basis to maximize marginal differences in deposit interest rates. This would be great for consumers, but would create very interesting new prudential risks. To the question of, “are policymakers ready?”: In some ways, yes, there’s growing awareness of both the promise and the risks of AI in financial services. But the technology is moving quickly, and the policy conversation needs to move just as fast. We’ll need thoughtful guardrails that protect consumers without stifling the kind of innovation that can actually improve their financial lives. At Revolut, we’re focused on building and integrating responsible AI that complements human service, but does not replace it. And we’re eager to work with regulators to help shape the frameworks that will govern this next chapter of fintech.

The opinions shared in this article are the authors’ own and do not reflect the views of any organization they are affiliated with.

Open Banker curates and shares policy perspectives in the evolving landscape of financial services for free.

If an idea matters, you’ll find it here. If you find an idea here, it matters. 

Interested in contributing to Open Banker? Send us an email at [email protected].