9 mega banks block crypto accounts, but new OCC rules bite back

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s Oct. 14 debanking findings identify historical restrictions on digital asset issuers, exchanges, and administrators, often attributed to financial crime considerations.

The findings review crypto banking decisions across policies at the nine largest national banks the agency supervises.

For smaller crypto businesses, an individual bank’s risk assessment remains an important gate to access. Comptroller Jonathan Gould is preserving objective customer decisions while challenging improper exclusion.

The consequential test is how the OCC distinguishes financial, operational, or compliance constraints from disapproval of a lawful business, and whether its scrutiny produces usable banking services.

The functions at stake extend beyond opening a deposit account. On June 29, 2026, BNY announced stablecoin services for institutional clients, including holding USDC in BNY custody and instructing Circle through BNY to mint USDC from dollars or redeem it for dollars.

The arrangement links digital asset custody with the dollar side of stablecoin activity. BNY described service availability for its institutional clients, while eligibility for smaller crypto businesses and broader competitive effects remain unresolved.

The OCC’s findings cover policies between 2020 and September 2025. The reviewed banks were JPMorgan Chase Bank, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo Bank, US Bank, Capital One, PNC Bank, TD Bank and BMO Bank.

The agency said it reviewed nearly 100,000 complaints and received about 50,000 documents totaling about 420,000 pages, as part of its broader inquiry across customer sectors.

Its official summary says many institutions restricted banking for digital-asset issuers, exchanges, or administrators, often citing financial crime considerations. Across the industries examined, restrictions ranged from categorical prohibitions to additional reviews and approvals.

The broad finding covers all nine banks, while the digital asset discussion describes restrictions at many institutions. Specific crypto policies and the grounds for individual refusals remain case-level questions.

In his Oct. 14 remarks, Gould said banks should evaluate customers using objective, risk-based criteria. His approach preserves decisions to decline individual customers on those grounds.

The administration’s August 2025 fair-banking executive order takes the same approach. It disclaims any privately enforceable right or benefit created by the order, leaving existing statutory protections intact.

The OCC and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation issued their final reputation-risk rule on April 7, and it became effective June 9. Its prohibitions govern the agencies’ supervisory conduct and pressure on banks over customer relationships.

The final rule defines reputation risk in terms of public-perception concerns that are separate from a bank’s financial or operational condition. It preserves Bank Secrecy Act enforcement authority, and its account-relationship provision exempts OFAC-sanctioned persons, entities, or jurisdictions.

The accompanying explanation explicitly prohibits supervisors from using anti-money laundering concerns as a pretext for reputation-risk supervision.

In a separate BSA enforcement case, the OCC assessed a $750 million civil money penalty against Bank of America on Oct. 13, citing transaction-monitoring, reporting, expertise, and training deficiencies.