Floorplan: build vs. buy debate

A regional-bank executive just said artificial intelligence will let banks “out-code” software vendors, and Fifth Third’s chief executive said the technology is already writing 40% of that bank’s code. The claim is simple: if banks can build faster themselves, they may stop buying as much off-the-shelf software. (americanbanker.com) (bloomberg.com) That logic works best for broad bank tasks like spotting risky loans or preparing for exams, which Jay Plum at Fifth Third specifically pointed to in the American Banker interview. Those are bank-wide workflows, so a large institution can spread one internal tool across many business lines. (americanbanker.com) Floorplan finance is narrower and messier. It is the business of lending against a dealer’s inventory, usually vehicles, where the lender tracks each unit, each title, each credit line, and each repayment event instead of just one borrower and one monthly bill. (business.bofa.com) (shawsystems.com) That is why floorplan software talks about stock audits, dealer-to-dealer unit transfers, vehicle-level status screens, automated dealer payments, and “curtailment” plans. A curtailment is a required paydown on a specific unit after it sits too long, like a grocery store marking down old produce before it spoils. (shawsystems.com) (dealerfloorplanguide.com) The hard part is not just making a screen or a chatbot. The hard part is proving, in an audit, that the bank knows which car exists, where the title is, how much of the line is still available, and whether an overdue unit triggered the right paydown at the right time. (shawsystems.com) (dealerfloorplanguide.com) That makes the build-versus-buy debate different here than in a credit-card app or a call-center tool. A bank can use artificial intelligence to write code faster, but it still has to encode years of dealer exceptions, auction integrations, collateral rules, and collections steps that specialist vendors already package. (americanbanker.com) (shawsystems.com) (vero-technologies.com) The funding side is getting more tense at the same time. On April 7, 2026, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation approved a proposed rule to implement parts of the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for United States Stablecoins Act, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued its own proposed rule last month. (fdic.gov) (occ.gov) The act itself creates a framework for “permitted payment stablecoin issuers” and spells out how reserves can be held, including in omnibus accounts. That is why some analysts are warning that deposits could move if customers start treating regulated stablecoins as another place to park cash. (congress.gov) (fdic.gov) One market note this week called it a “$6 trillion tug-of-war,” which is a dramatic estimate, not an official government forecast. Even if that number proves too high, the direction of travel is clear from the rulemakings: banks are preparing for a world where deposits may become less sticky and more contested. (financialcontent.com) (fdic.gov) (occ.gov) For a floorplan lender, less-sticky funding changes the daily job. If your own deposits cost more or move faster, you need tighter control over which dealer lines can expand, which units need curtailments, and how quickly cash comes back from sold inventory. (business.bofa.com) (dealerfloorplanguide.com) So the real argument is not whether banks can generate code. It is whether they can generate the right controls fast enough to manage a specialist inventory business while funding competition is rising underneath them. (americanbanker.com) (fdic.gov) (shawsystems.com)