US Regulator Exposes 9 Major Banks for ’Inappropriate’ Restrictions in Crypto ’Debanking’ Crackdown
Nine of America's biggest banks just got called out by a federal regulator—for slamming doors on crypto businesses.
The Hammer Comes Down
Forget subtle warnings. The regulator's report names names, detailing how these financial giants imposed what it calls 'inappropriate' restrictions. Think sudden account closures, frozen transactions, and blanket rejections—all targeting legitimate crypto firms trying to play by the rules. It's a formal rebuke that cuts through the usual banking vagueness.
The 'Debanking' Playbook Exposed
The findings reveal a pattern: banks using excessive compliance fears as a cover to sideline an entire industry. Instead of tailored risk assessments, they deployed blunt-force policies that effectively banned crypto clients. The regulator argues this isn't just unfair—it stifles innovation and pushes financial activity into less visible corners. After all, when traditional finance won't serve you, you find other options.
A Watershed for Crypto Finance?
This isn't just a scolding. It's a potential turning point. The report signals that blanket discrimination against a lawful sector won't be tolerated. For crypto companies, it's a long-awaited validation of their struggle for basic banking services. For the banks, it's a directive to reform their approach—or face tougher scrutiny. The message is clear: manage risk, don't just eliminate it.
The move exposes the ironic conservatism of mega-banks—the same institutions that gamble on complex derivatives get spooked by a digital asset ledger. It seems innovation is only welcome when they control the patents.
Regulator Says Banks Used Charter Powers Improperly as Crypto Debanking Spread
Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould said the agency’s early findings show that these policies were not isolated cases but widespread across the institutions reviewed.
He described the practices as harmful to lawful enterprises and an inappropriate use of a national bank charter.
OCC head Jonathan Gould said that crypto firms seeking federal bank charters should be evaluated on par with traditional financial firms.#OCC #USBankCharter #DigitalAssetFirmshttps://t.co/hXWT3OU9GX
While the banks have insisted that they did not engage in discriminatory account closures, the OCC said many of the policies were visible publicly, and its investigations will continue until a full accounting is completed.
The agency’s work builds on a review launched in September 2025 and covers thousands of complaints, including claims of political and religious debanking.
According to the regulator, those findings will be released later. Debanking typically occurs when banks decide it is safer to sever ties with certain customers rather than risk regulatory scrutiny.
In the case of crypto businesses, the pressure has often come indirectly through warnings, consultations, or guidance that banks interpret as cautionary notes from their regulators.
Crypto’s biggest battle isn’t just regulation — it’s access to banks. This op-ed breaks down why debanking is hurting innovation — and how to fix it.#Debanking #CryptoRegulationhttps://t.co/aSuleCKQJm
One example referenced in the broader debate occurred when the FDIC encouraged banks to “pause” crypto-related activities without issuing a direct prohibition.
That kind of communication, combined with compliance fears, made the sector a high-risk area for banks to service and left crypto firms struggling to maintain basic operational accounts.
Crypto Debanking Sparks Political Clash Amid New Fair-Access Push
The issue has grown into a political flashpoint. President TRUMP signed an executive order in August intended to stop the practice of debanking customers solely for involvement in crypto or other legal industries.
Lawmakers in states such as Florida, Idaho, Tennessee, and others have pushed their own “fair access” laws designed to block banks from using ideological or non-financial criteria when assessing customers.
Earlier this month, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon recently rejected claims that the bank closes accounts based on political considerations.
JP Morgan CEO admits, “We do debank” but says it’s not for politics but from crypto execs to religious groups; many claim otherwise.
#debanking #JPMorgan https://t.co/m8zi06Jfib
His comments followed accusations from crypto executives and conservative groups who say they were cut off without clear explanations.
The controversy deepened last month when Strike CEO Jack Mallers said his accounts were abruptly closed under vague references to “concerning activity,” fueling renewed allegations of a modern “Operation Chokepoint.”
Strike CEO @jackmallers says JPMorgan @Chase abruptly terminated his personal bank accounts in September without offering any explanation.#Strike #JPMorganhttps://t.co/nia2Vj4dYV
Regulators consistently deny any coordinated effort to cut off crypto access, arguing that decisions stem from anti-money-laundering obligations. Federal law requires banks to monitor and report suspicious activity, and institutions face steep penalties when they fail to comply.
The tensions extend beyond bank account closures. Former U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli has argued in court filings that crypto-focused Custodia Bank was denied a Federal Reserve master account because regulators treated the digital asset sector as inherently unsafe.
Several former officials and lawmakers have filed briefs supporting the claim. The case remains on appeal and could take on greater significance after a recent Supreme Court opinion curbed deference to federal agencies’ interpretations of the law.
