ABA urges NCUA to retain deposit advertising requirement for credit unions

NCUA has proposed eliminating the requirement that federally insured credit unions include the standard “federally insured by NCUA” advertising statement in their ads, and ABA is pushing back, urging NCUA to keep that requirement (or, at minimum, to align with FDIC’s updated deposit‑insurance signage framework to avoid consumer confusion).

What NCUA is proposing

• NCUA’s “deregulation project” includes a proposal to streamline Part 740 (Accuracy of Advertising and Notice of Insured Status). The proposal would delete the prescriptive requirement in 12 CFR 740.5 that credit unions include an official advertising statement in their ads.

• Credit unions would still have to display the official NCUA insurance sign where deposits are “usually and normally received,” and advertising would still have to be truthful and accurate about insured status, but there would no longer be a mandatory tagline in ads or on digital marketing materials.​

ABA’s position and comment letter

• ABA submitted a comment letter on Feb. 26, 2026, stating it was “puzzled” that NCUA would move away from mandated insured‑status disclosures in advertising at the same time FDIC has modernized and tightened deposit‑insurance signage and disclosure rules for banks across digital and physical channels.

• ABA argues that removing the advertising statement requirement for credit unions, while banks remain subject to FDIC advertising and signage rules, creates divergent frameworks that heighten the risk of consumer confusion about what is and is not insured, especially in a landscape with many non‑bank providers offering “deposit‑like” products.

Alignment with FDIC framework

• ABA points to FDIC’s 2023–2024 updates to Part 328, which clarified insured‑status messaging in digital environments (websites, apps, social media, and hybrid bank–fintech arrangements) and then calibrated timing and placement expectations to ease compliance while preserving clear signals for consumers.​

• ABA urges NCUA to “align its approach” with this calibrated FDIC framework, so that consumers see consistent insured‑status cues across banks and credit unions, particularly in digital channels where they routinely encounter marketing from both charters.

Suggested “guardrails” if NCUA proceeds

• ABA concedes that some reduction in prescriptiveness could be appropriate, but only with guardrails that preserve clear insured‑status messaging.

• The letter suggests that if NCUA goes forward with dropping the mandatory advertising statement, it should:

  • Coordinate with FDIC on common principles for insured‑status communications across charters.

  • Offer model “best‑practice” examples or optional templates for voluntary insured‑status cues in digital and traditional advertising.

  • Ensure that any streamlined rule does not undercut the clarity consumers currently receive on deposit insurance across different providers.

Relationship to Truth in Savings / Part 707

• This NCUA proposal is distinct from—but sits alongside—Part 707 (Truth in Savings for credit unions), which already requires specific disclosures (such as APY, applicable conditions, and fees that may reduce earnings) when credit unions advertise deposit terms or use “trigger” terms.

• ABA’s concern is not about those TISA‑style content disclosures, but about the baseline insured‑status signaling that currently comes from mandatory use of the NCUA advertising statement; removing that requirement for credit unions, while banks continue under FDIC’s updated framework, could fragment what should be a uniform consumer signal about deposit insurance.