\n
![](\"https:\/\/media.crypto.news\/2025\/10\/crypto-news-The-big-banks-worrying-option03.webp\")
<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n
The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has identified bank policies restricting digital asset businesses in a 47-page review of nine major banks, but has been unable to measure the full extent of debanking.<\/p>\n
\n Summary<\/span>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency said<\/a> in its Wednesday release that certain banks maintained \u201cpublic and nonpublic policies\u201d limiting services to industries including digital assets, oil and gas, tobacco and firearms.<\/p>\n In the agency\u2019s account, restrictions affected several types of crypto businesses rather than a single activity or service. Its findings named issuers, exchanges and administrators among the digital asset businesses subject to bank policies.<\/p>\n \u201cMany institutions also placed restrictions on banking digital asset activities, including on issuers, exchanges, or administrators, often attributed to financial crime considerations,\u201d the OCC said.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n <\/p>\n Despite identifying restrictive policies, the regulator said it had been \u201cunable to quantify on a comprehensive basis the full extent of debanking or alleged debanking actions\u201d through its review of nine major banks.<\/p>\n The OCC\u2019s 47-page report<\/a> did not provide specific examples involving digital asset activities. Its discussion of crypto restrictions therefore included the kinds of businesses affected and banks\u2019 stated concerns, without detailing individual account closures.<\/p>\n In accompanying remarks<\/a>, Comptroller Jonathan Gould focused largely on restrictions involving coal and firearms. Discussing coal-related banking decisions, he challenged the reasons institutions gave for withdrawing support.<\/p>\n \u201cThese decisions were not based on financial risk,\u201d Gould said.<\/p>\n According to the comptroller, banks instead cited negative headlines, public protests and the reputational consequences they associated with supporting the coal industry. His comments concerned coal-related decisions, while the report separately described financial crime considerations cited for digital asset restrictions.<\/p>\n The OCC attributed its review to Trump\u2019s August 2025 executive order addressing what the president called \u201cunlawful debanking.\u201d<\/p>\n As crypto.news previously reported in August 2025, Trump\u2019s anti-debanking executive order<\/a>, titled \u201cGuaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,\u201d established a policy against denying financial services because of protected beliefs, affiliations, or political views.<\/p>\n Under the order\u2019s stated policy, banking decisions should rest on assessments of each customer using objective, risk-based criteria. Its protections addressed access to financial services for Americans and lawful businesses, rather than crypto companies alone.<\/p>\n Responding to the order, venture capitalist Nic Carter warned that distinguishing political exclusion from business decisions could prove difficult. In his assessment, regulatory pressure can make a customer expensive to serve, allowing a bank to describe an account closure as an ordinary commercial decision.<\/p>\n Carter also argued that banks should remain able to end relationships with unprofitable or excessively risky clients. His proposed response focused on transparency and accountability so customers could receive timely, precise explanations for account closures.<\/p>\n The supplied report places the executive order after industry allegations that officials under former President Joe Biden influenced banks to withdraw services from crypto firms.<\/p>\n In a separate study covered on Jan. 12, the Cato Institute attributed much US debanking to direct or indirect government pressure. Its research on banking access<\/a> distinguished government-driven exclusion from closures based on political beliefs, religious affiliations, or ordinary business reasons.<\/p>\n According to the study, direct pressure can involve letters or court orders instructing banks to terminate accounts. Indirect pressure can arise when rules make particular customers too risky for institutions to serve.<\/p>\n Citing Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation correspondence, Cato said banks had received requests to pause crypto-related activities without clear timelines or follow-up. The institute identified cryptocurrency businesses among the sectors affected by such pressure.<\/p>\n Although Cato credited executive actions and changes in agency leadership with addressing some concerns, its report argued that lasting reform required congressional action.<\/p>\n Among its proposals, the institute called for changes to the Bank Secrecy Act, an end to regulation based on reputational risk and fewer confidentiality restrictions shielding government pressure from public scrutiny.<\/p>\n An Aug. 14 report documented JPMorgan\u2019s closure of Polymarket\u2019s account<\/a>. According to the Financial Times, the bank ended that relationship in October 2025 over regulatory concerns and directed the prediction market company to find another banking partner.<\/p>\n Polymarket subsequently moved to another bank, the FT reported. In comments to the publication, the company said it retained relationships with JPMorgan entities involving operational connections and customer fund flows, despite the account closure.<\/p>\n On a separate regulatory track, Gould said on Aug. 11 that digital asset companies conducting legally permitted activities should have a route into the US national banking system.<\/p>\n Coverage published Aug. 12 described the OCC\u2019s crypto bank charter policy<\/a> and the agency\u2019s receipt of 40 new-bank applications over the preceding 18 months, including national trust bank applications. At that time, its digital asset licensing list contained 13 pending applications.<\/p>\n According to OCC records cited in that coverage, the regulator denied Wise National Trust\u2019s application on July 21.<\/p>\n <\/p><\/div>\n\n\n
\n
Crypto debanking restrictions remain difficult to quantify<\/h2>\n
Trump\u2019s order required risk-based banking decisions<\/h2>\n
Earlier research tied account closures to government pressure<\/h2>\n
Recent bank decisions include closures and charter applications<\/h2>\n