Nine national banks cut off customers on subjective grounds, OCC review finds
OCC review of the nine largest national banks found policies that cut off some customers on subjective grounds instead of financial risk. The regulator announced no penalties and said only that it may consider policy changes, mezha.net reported from Reuters.
The Engineer · Build desk
OCC: no sanctions, may consider policy changes. Reviewed banks used subjective criteria, not financial risk, lacking measurable reputational-risk standards. Banks deny political or religious refusals and cite regulatory pressure. OCC will assess anti-money-laundering policies' role.
- Who has to decide decision OCC Announced no sanctions; says it may consider policy changes to deter debanking in future, claim 7
- Who's exposed exposure The banks reviewed Applied policies limiting some customers' access on subjective criteria rather than financial risk, claim 4
- What it limits constraint The banks reviewed Generally lacked clear, measurable standards for assessing reputational risk, the OCC said, claim 6
- What doesn't add up contradiction The large banks Deny refusing customers on political or religious grounds; cite years of strict regulatory pressure, claim 8
- Who has to decide decision OCC and regulatory partners Will assess how far banks' anti-money-laundering policies contributed to debanking, and act as needed, claim 9
| Who | How | Kind | Claim |
|---|---|---|---|
| OCC | Announced no sanctions; says it may consider policy changes to deter debanking in future | decision | 7 |
| The banks reviewed | Applied policies limiting some customers' access on subjective criteria rather than financial risk | exposure | 4 |
| The banks reviewed | Generally lacked clear, measurable standards for assessing reputational risk, the OCC said | constraint | 6 |
| The large banks | Deny refusing customers on political or religious grounds; cite years of strict regulatory pressure | contradiction | 8 |
| OCC and regulatory partners | Will assess how far banks' anti-money-laundering policies contributed to debanking, and act as needed | decision | 9 |
What happened
- The nine banks were chosen by asset size, and together they hold most of the assets of US commercial banks.
- The one specific example the OCC gave is a bank that distanced itself from client relationships that could look partisan because it worried about public opinion.
- The banks deny refusing customers on political or religious grounds and say years of strict regulatory pressure discouraged them from serving certain sectors.
Why it matters
- Who has to decide decision The OCC's stated defect is the missing threshold, so a bank that keeps a reputational-risk screen would need to write down a measurable test for it.
- What doesn't add up contradiction The banks blame supervisory pressure while the OCC points to bank-level anti-money-laundering policies, and the follow-up work with other regulators will decide which account holds.
- What it limits constraint Until the OCC proposes policy text, the review creates no new rule for the nine banks and no enforcement exposure.
Subjectivity gets into a bank policy through a missing threshold. The OCC said the banks generally lacked clear, measurable standards and objective risk-based criteria for assessing the reputational risk of a customer relationship [6]. In our view this is the operative finding. Where no number or test defines the risk, the call falls to whoever reviews the file, and two reviewers can reach opposite answers on the same account.
The reported evidence of political motive is narrower than the framing suggests. The one concrete example is that worry about public opinion led at least one bank to keep away from client relationships that might look "partisan" [5]. Such a decision is a reputational judgment of the kind the OCC says lacked a measurable standard. The account mezha.net published from Reuters does not name the banks or say how many customers were cut off.
Both sides, in effect, are asking for written criteria. The banks want them from Washington, and they urged it to set clearer rules on whom banks may serve [14]. The OCC wants them inside the banks [6].
The OCC also left a second thread open. It said it will keep working with its regulatory partners to assess how far banks' anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorist-financing compliance policies contributed to debanking, and will act as appropriate [9]. We'd expect the banks' argument about regulatory pressure to come up there. The OCC's wording covers bank policies, not supervisory practice.
The factor the OCC criticizes was already being retired. After President Trump signed an order to review alleged debanking, regulators and banks began dropping "reputational risk" when assessing clients [10]. Any policy change the OCC now considers would land on a practice that is partly gone.
The politics are live. Trump sued JPMorgan Chase and its chief executive Jamie Dimon for $5 billion in 2026, accusing the bank of closing several of his accounts for political reasons, and JPMorgan denies it [12].
Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould said in a written statement, according to the Ukrainian-language report, that fair access to financial services is a requirement and more than a slogan [15].
What to watch
- Whether the OCC publishes actual policy language, and whether it sets measurable reputational-risk criteria or removes the factor.
- What the OCC's follow-up with other regulators concludes about anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorist-financing policies as a cause of cutoffs.
- Whether the Justice Department's investigation of closed accounts produces compensation or findings that differ from the OCC's.
Clarity's read
What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.
Reality
- Evidence68
- Adoption
- Not scored
- Hype gap+25
- Incentives60
- Confidence65
Claim ledger
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
- [1]
A report by the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) said several of the country's largest banks unfairly denied some customers access to banking services on political, religious or other grounds.
- [2]
The OCC review covered the nine largest national banks it supervises, chosen by asset size; together they hold most of US commercial bank assets.
- [3]
The OCC began the review in September 2025.
- [4]
According to the OCC, the banks applied policies that limited some customers' access to financial services on subjective criteria rather than financial risk.
- [5]
According to the OCC, concern about public opinion led at least one bank to distance itself from certain client relationships that could be seen as 'partisan'.
- [6]
The OCC said the banks generally lacked clear, measurable standards and objective risk-based criteria for assessing the reputational risks of customer relationships.
- [7]
The OCC announced no sanctions and said it may consider policy changes to deter debanking in future.
- [8]
The large banks deny that they refused customers on political or religious grounds, and say years of strict regulatory pressure discouraged them from serving certain sectors.
- [9]
The OCC report says the OCC will continue to work with regulatory partners to assess further the extent to which banks' anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorist-financing compliance policies contributed to debanking, and will take appropriate action as needed.
- [10]
After President Donald Trump signed an order to review alleged cases of debanking, regulators and banks began abandoning the use of 'reputational risk' when assessing clients.
- [11]
Conservative politicians and business groups have accused banks of ending service to companies in sectors such as fossil fuels, firearms and cryptocurrencies.
- [12]
In 2026 Trump filed a $5 billion lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase and its chief executive Jamie Dimon, accusing the bank of closing several of his accounts for political reasons; JPMorgan denies closing accounts on political or religious grounds.
- [13]
The US Justice Department is investigating whether big banks closed the accounts of Trump supporters and whether the results could become grounds for compensation to those affected.
- [14]
The big banks urged Washington to set clearer rules on whom banks may serve.
- [15]
Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould said in a written statement: 'Fair access to financial services is not a slogan, but a requirement.'
Get this ledger inside ChatGPT. Ask about any of our stories and the answer brings its figure, each claim’s verdict and the sources. Free, no account.
Sources
2 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.
- crowdfundinsider.comOCC Debanking Report Shows that Financial Services Firms Denied Services During Biden Administration
1 article · October 15, 2026
- mezha.netРегулятор банків США розкритикував великі банки за практику «відключення від банківських послуг»
2 articles · October 14, 2026
Topics and entities
Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.
Topics
- DebankingFollow
- Bank RegulationFollow