Coinbase Escalates Fight With Australian Banks Over Crypto Bans

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-02-05Last updated on 2026-02-05

Abstract

Coinbase has formally complained to Australia's parliament, accusing the country's four major banks—Commonwealth Bank, Westpac, ANZ, and National Australia Bank—of blocking or shutting down services for legitimate crypto firms without warning. The exchange argues these actions create significant barriers for crypto businesses that depend on banking services. It calls for mandatory rules requiring banks to provide explanations, advance notice, dispute channels, and transparent compliance checks. Banks defend their actions by citing anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing risks, stating that some crypto activities are difficult to monitor. The issue particularly affects smaller crypto firms, forcing some to consider moving operations overseas. Parliamentary hearings are expected to address the conflict between financial safety and business access, potentially leading to clearer regulations or stronger oversight.

Coinbase has taken a louder stand against Australia’s biggest banks, saying those banks are shutting down or blocking services for legitimate crypto firms.

The exchange lodged a formal complaint with the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics and argues that the problem goes beyond occasional account closures — it has become a common barrier for companies that rely on bank accounts and payment rails to do business.

Coinbase Raises Formal Complaint

Based on reports, Coinbase asks for clearer rules and more fairness. It wants banks to explain why they close accounts, give at least 30 days’ notice before cutting services, set up dispute channels, and publish compliance checks.

Coinbase submitted a report to the House’s SCE, naming Commonwealth Bank, Westpac, ANZ, and National Australia Bank. It alleges the banks are closing accounts without warning and blocking crypto-related transactions.

Reports say the company also calls on lawmakers to make those rules mandatory so firms can’t be cut off without cause.

One study cited in coverage found as much as 60% of some fintechs were denied banking in recent years, and Coinbase uses figures like that to show the problem is widespread.

Banks Cite Risk And Compliance Concerns

Banks respond that they act to meet anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorism financing rules. They argue that some crypto activity is hard to monitor and that cutting ties can be a compliance step when risk can’t be clearly managed.

Bank customers and regulators want safe payment systems, and banks say they must weigh that against new business lines.

Total crypto market cap currently at $2.53 trillion. Chart: TradingView

At times, actions by lenders are reactive; at other times they follow formal internal policies. That difference matters because it affects how easy it is for a firm to appeal a decision.

Who Gets Hurt When Banking Is Closed

Small exchanges, payment processors, and other crypto services feel the squeeze. When a bank ends a relationship, transactions slow, wages need alternative accounts, and trust gets strained.

Reports say some startups consider moving operations overseas where banking is more welcoming. That risk has policy implications: if local fintechs leave, jobs go with them and the country may miss out on new services. The result is a tug-of-war between financial safety and business access.

What Comes Next For Regulators

Parliamentary hearings are now a likely next step, and those sessions could press banks for more detail and push regulators to set clearer rules.

Australia’s financial watchdogs have discussed the issue before but stopped short of forcing banks to change. The committee will hear evidence, and it can recommend legal changes or stronger guidance to make sure account closures are tracked and justified.

Featured image by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images, chart from TradingView

Related Questions

QWhat formal action has Coinbase taken against Australian banks regarding crypto service restrictions?

ACoinbase has lodged a formal complaint with the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, accusing major Australian banks of blocking or shutting down services for legitimate crypto firms.

QWhich specific Australian banks did Coinbase name in its complaint?

ACoinbase named Commonwealth Bank, Westpac, ANZ, and National Australia Bank in its formal complaint.

QWhat reasons do banks give for restricting services to crypto-related firms?

ABanks cite anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing compliance concerns, stating that some crypto activities are difficult to monitor and pose risks that are hard to manage.

QWhat percentage of fintechs were reportedly denied banking services according to the study mentioned?

AThe study cited in the coverage found that as much as 60% of some fintechs were denied banking services in recent years.

QWhat potential consequence does the article mention if Australian crypto startups move operations overseas?

AIf local crypto startups move operations overseas due to banking restrictions, jobs may be lost and Australia could miss out on new financial services and innovations.

Related Reads

In Jinjiang, Fujian, a Storage Super Unicorn Lies Quiet

In Fujian's Jinjiang, a city known for sportswear, lies a quiet semiconductor giant: Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit Co. (JHICC). Once a promising domestic DRAM manufacturer alongside Yangtze Memory and ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT), its journey was derailed in 2018 when the U.S. placed it on an Entity List and filed criminal charges for alleged trade secret theft. This halted production for years. A turning point came in February 2024 when a U.S. federal court found JHICC not guilty. However, it had lost crucial time. While CXMT soared to become a top-valued A-share company in 2024, JHICC, with an estimated valuation of 80 billion RMB, was just restarting. Its current output is primarily customized DDR4 chips, not the advanced DDR5/HBM demanded for AI, but it still benefits from the broader memory chip upcycle. JHICC's story is tied to Chen Zhengkun, a veteran engineer who left Micron to lead the venture. Founded in 2016 with state-backed funding, JHICC partnered with Taiwan's UMC to develop DRAM technology. Rapid progress was cut short by the U.S. actions, which Micron initiated, partly due to its heavy reliance on the Chinese market. Post-sanctions, Chen's team worked to rebuild the production line with reduced reliance on U.S. technology. According to its records, JHICC achieved small-scale production and revenue growth under immense pressure. It now focuses on the stable "niche" DRAM market (e.g., TVs, routers) with a monthly capacity of ~40,000 wafers, aiming for 60,000 by 2026. It holds over 1,000 patents but remains on the Entity List. For Jinjiang, investing in JHICC was a bold industrial leap. The local government provided unwavering financial and logistical support during the crisis, helping the company survive. JHICC has become the anchor for a growing local semiconductor cluster. Though its scale lags behind domestic peers, JHICC's persistence symbolizes a hard-won foothold in a global market long dominated by Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron. Having missed one boom, it seeks a place in the new AI-driven memory supercycle.

marsbit2h ago

In Jinjiang, Fujian, a Storage Super Unicorn Lies Quiet

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片