A Cato Institute analysis, released on January 8, shows that most financial account closures across the US are driven by directives or recommendations from regulatory bodies, rather than decisions made solely by banks.
Analyst Nicholas Anthony studies various circumstances behind account terminations and identifies four categories: operational reasons, religious grounds, political factors, and pressure from government entities.
According to the findings, the last category, situations where regulators intervene directly or indirectly, makes up the majority of cases.
Did you know?
Subscribe – We publish new crypto explainer videos every week!
What is Decentralized Crypto Gambling? (Animated Explainer)
Agencies such as the FDIC are mentioned in the report for issuing formal letters urging banks to step back from certain activities, including those tied to cryptocurrency.
Operational justifications are also discussed, including situations in which banks cut off customers for practical or business-related reasons. In contrast, very few closures appear linked to clients’ religious or political affiliations, with the data showing they are less frequent than those linked to authority influence.
The analysis notes that directives from government agencies can sometimes be vague. Often, these communications do not lay out specific actions or deadlines, which makes it difficult for affected customers to respond or appeal the decisions.
The report advises that improvements should come from lawmakers. Three main recommendations include making the Bank Secrecy Act less restrictive, eliminating laws that conceal the details of communication between regulators and banks, and removing “reputational risk” guidance that leads banks to end relationships for unclear reasons.
Recently, seven senior Labour MPs urged PM, Keir Starmer, to ban crypto donations in the next elections bill. Why? Read the full story.
