OCC Highlights Major Concerns Over Crypto Debanking Practices Among Major Banks

bitcoinistPublished on 2025-12-11Last updated on 2025-12-11

Abstract

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has raised concerns over "harmful debanking policies" among nine major US banks, including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo. A review found that between 2020 and 2023, these institutions restricted services or imposed heightened scrutiny on customers in legal industries—including crypto, oil and gas, firearms, and adult entertainment—based on the banks' own values rather than legality. OCC Comptroller Jonathan V. Gould criticized the use of "government-granted charter and market power" for such practices. The agency is evaluating thousands of debanking complaints and recently allowed national banks to facilitate crypto transactions, aiming to provide a more regulated environment than external exchanges.

On Wednesday, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) released findings that have raised alarm bells regarding crypto debanking, reigniting fears of what some are dubbing “Operation Chokepoint 2.0” within the financial sector.

This supervisory review focused on nine of the largest national banks under OCC supervision, including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, US Bank, Capital One, PNC Bank, TD Bank, and BMO Bank.

‘Harmful Debanking Policies’

The preliminary findings from the OCC reveal troubling trends: between 2020 and 2023, these banks appeared to make unwarranted distinctions among customers based on their legal business activities.

Specifically, many of these institutions maintained policies that either restricted access to financial services or required heightened scrutiny and approvals for certain clients.

The OCC identified examples where at least one bank imposed limitations on various sectors, including crypto, due to their engagement in activities considered “contrary to [the bank’s] values,” even though those activities were not illegal.

Sectors affected by these policies included oil and gas exploration, coal mining, firearms, private prisons, tobacco and e-cigarettes, adult entertainment, and notably, digital assets.

The findings indicated that many banks placed strict limitations on crypto-related activities as well, which often stemmed from concerns about financial crime.

These practices, the OCC confirmed, were prevalent at each of the banks examined in the review. Comptroller Jonathan V. Gould expressed frustration regarding the situation, stating:

It is unfortunate that the nation’s largest banks thought these harmful debanking policies were an appropriate use of their government-granted charter and market power.

Gould noted that while many of these policies were publicly announced, some banks have maintained that they did not participate in debanking.

In his comments, Comptroller Gould emphasized the OCC’s commitment to eliminating practices that would “weaponize finance,” whether instigated by regulators or the banks themselves.

National Banks To Facilitate Crypto Transactions

The agency disclosed that it is still evaluating “thousands of complaints” related to allegations of political and religious debanking, with plans to report on these findings “in due course.” The OCC aims to hold banks accountable for these actions and ensure that unlawful debanking practices do not persist.

This follows Tuesday’s letter from the banking regulator that allows national banks to participate in “riskless principal transactions” involving cryptocurrencies. This permits national banks to buy and sell cryptocurrencies for their customers’ accounts.

This new structure allows users to transact in crypto-assets through established national banks, resulting in a more regulated environment than exchanges that operate outside of strict oversight regulation.

The daily chart shows the total crypto market cap valuation at $3.16 trillion. Source: TOTAL on TradingView.com

Featured image from DALL-E, chart from TradingView.com

Related Reads

Comprehensive Analysis of the AI Inference Market: How Can Crypto Projects Break Through?

"AI Inference Market: A Strategic Overview and Crypto's Path to Disruption" The AI inference market, where trained models generate responses to user prompts, is now the primary economic driver, surpassing model training in value. This market is fragmented: hyperscalers (AWS, Google, Microsoft) dominate enterprise reliability; specialized providers (Together, Fireworks) optimize performance; and routing platforms like OpenRouter act as critical bottlenecks, dynamically allocating requests based on cost, latency, and privacy. Crypto AI networks are not competing directly on reliability but are carving out distinct niches: permissionless access, lower-cost supply, privacy, verifiable computation, and agent-native payments. Key projects include Chutes (decentralized inference platform), Akash & io.net (GPU marketplaces), Targon (confidential computing), Darkbloom & Venice (private, consumer-focused inference), and NuNet (orchestration for distributed workloads). The core differentiator is that traditional providers sell trust and enterprise workflows, while crypto networks offer new incentive loops, censorship resistance, and programmable access to resources like compute. For crypto projects to succeed, key metrics are paid token volume (not just usage), sustainable GPU provider revenue, integration into routers like OpenRouter, robust verification against fraud, and genuine privacy guarantees. Ultimately, market control will belong to entities that route, verify, and settle demand—not just those supplying raw compute. The inference market is evolving to resemble a financial system, with tokens as units of account, and crypto's unique value propositions position it to capture emerging segments in this expanding landscape.

Foresight News16m ago

Comprehensive Analysis of the AI Inference Market: How Can Crypto Projects Break Through?

Foresight News16m ago

The War Without a Unified Name: The Domestic Tech Giants' World Model Landscape

The article outlines the diverse and fragmented landscape of "World Models" in China's tech industry, where major players are pursuing similar goals under different names like world foundational models, physical AI, or integrated within autonomous driving and embodied intelligence systems. The core aim is to enable AI to create an internal, dynamic environment for simulation, reasoning, and learning, reducing reliance on infinite real-world data. This "data engine" allows for unlimited generation, experimentation, and iteration. The report categorizes the approaches of different companies: * **Internet Giants:** Alibaba is developing models for linguistic, virtual, and physical worlds (Qwen-AgentWorld, HappyOyster, Qwen-RobotWorld). Tencent's HY-World focuses on 3D, game, and social scenarios. ByteDance leverages its vast video data for a potential "digital twin" model. Huawei integrates its model into industrial applications like smart cars and robotics without separately branding it. Baidu embeds world model capabilities within its Apollo autonomous driving and Ernie systems. * **Automakers:** Companies like NIO, Li Auto, XPeng, and Geely are using world models as virtual "driving schools" and "testing grounds." They generate complex scenarios (e.g., rain, snow) to train and validate autonomous driving systems in simulation, aiming for more capable and safer AI drivers. * **Autonomous Driving Suppliers:** Firms such as Momenta, Horizon Robotics, Haomo.ai, and DeepRoute.ai are building the underlying "world engines." They focus on large-scale video generation for simulation, reinforcement learning, and enhancing end-to-end autonomous driving models, often integrating these capabilities into commercial products. While startups bring focus and innovation, they face challenges like limited data, compute resources, and deployment channels. Large companies possess these advantages and are rapidly transitioning world models from research projects into core business infrastructure powering products in vehicles, games, and industry. The conclusion is that world models represent an evolution and convergence of existing AI fields into crucial industrial infrastructure, moving the competition from simply building a model to effectively deploying it to understand and interact with the physical world.

marsbit32m ago

The War Without a Unified Name: The Domestic Tech Giants' World Model Landscape

marsbit32m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片