Journalist
Hassan Shittu
Share
The U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has released preliminary findings from a sweeping review into debanking practices at the country’s nine largest national banks, revealing that all of them imposed “inappropriate” restrictions on lawful businesses, including firms operating in the digital-asset sector.
The review, ordered under President Donald Trump’s Executive Order on “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,” examined practices at JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bank, Capital One, PNC, TD Bank and BMO.
According to the regulator, these banks maintained internal policies between 2020 and 2023 that treated customers differently based on the nature of their legal business activities.
The OCC found that several institutions required escalated approvals or imposed blanket restrictions on entire sectors viewed as conflicting with the banks’ “values.”
The list of affected industries stretched from oil and gas to firearms, private prisons, tobacco, and adult entertainment. Digital asset companies were included among the businesses facing barriers.
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.
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.
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.
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.”
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.
Credit: Source link
