this... makes no sense strategically (though i understand your apple fandom). apple is a consumer electronics company. banking is a completely different industry, and a heavily regulated one at that.
apple's move here is to use applepay as a platform to allow other companies to do those things. they're executing that strategy quite competently. they won't (i.e., can't) ever become a bank (consumer, lending, commercial, or any other kind).
(and your overuse of capitalization is making me twitch uncontrollably =)
Its not really apple fandom, id be fine with Google or Microsoft or Facebook getting it right too. I do think Apple's stance on privacy makes them the most desirable company to handle taxes and investments? It makes strategic sense in that Apple is positioning itself as the tech giant to be trusted with your: communication, finance, passwords, photos etc.
Apple is not just an electronics company, and their latest earnings report makes that exact point. Its about subscriptions and service, not devices. They want to hook you on Apple Music.
Fintech isnt just banking. Intuit, Personal Capital, and Envestnet are services that layer on top of banking.
What I described is not an all or nothing approach, its a bunch of ideas. Apple could very much add money management services without offering lending.
Making someone like Schwab their "first party" bank would mostly be a commitment to customer service and "it just works" more like Apple Stores, than anything else.
apple's move here is to use applepay as a platform to allow other companies to do those things. they're executing that strategy quite competently. they won't (i.e., can't) ever become a bank (consumer, lending, commercial, or any other kind).
(and your overuse of capitalization is making me twitch uncontrollably =)