White House to target banks over alleged political, crypto discrimination

The White House is preparing to escalate pressure on major US banks over allegations of politically motivated discrimination, with a new executive order that could impose penalties on financial institutions accused of cutting ties with customers over political beliefs or connections to the cryptocurrency sector.

According to a draft order obtained by The Wall Street Journal, the Trump administration plans to instruct bank regulators to investigate whether financial institutions have breached federal laws such as the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, antitrust statutes, or consumer protection laws. Banks found in violation could face monetary fines, consent decrees, or other regulatory actions, Caliber.Az cites the WSJ report. 

The order, which could be signed as soon as this week, may still be revised or delayed, sources familiar with the matter told the Journal. Though no specific banks are named in the draft, it references a widely publicised case involving Bank of America, which was accused of shutting down the accounts of a Christian organisation in Uganda due to its religious affiliations. The bank has stated the closures were due to its policy of not serving small businesses operating outside the United States.

The draft also criticises the involvement of some banks in investigations related to the January 6, 2021, riot at the US Capitol, signalling a broader push by the administration to scrutinise the financial sector’s role in politically sensitive matters.

US banks have become increasingly wary of potential regulatory shifts under the second Trump administration. In June, The Wall Street Journal reported that an executive order targeting discrimination against conservatives and crypto companies was under consideration.

For years, conservative groups have claimed they were denied banking services based on their political or religious views. Meanwhile, cryptocurrency firms say they have struggled to access financial services during the Biden presidency, citing regulatory hostility toward the sector. Banks have largely defended such decisions, arguing they are based on legal and financial risk assessments, including compliance with US anti-money-laundering laws.

A Bank of America spokesperson said the bank supports efforts to clarify the regulatory environment. 

“We’ve provided detailed proposals and will continue to work with the administration and Congress to improve the regulatory framework,” he said.

In anticipation of federal action, several banks have engaged with Republican state attorneys general in recent months and revised their internal policies to explicitly state that political affiliation does not factor into their decisions.

The draft order reportedly instructs regulators to eliminate any existing policies that may have contributed to account closures. It also calls for the Small Business Administration to examine the practices of banks involved in guaranteeing its loans.

During Trump’s presidency, financial regulators signaled they would stop evaluating banks based on the reputational risk posed by their clients—a metric that some institutions had cited in declining to serve certain industries or groups.

In some cases, the new order would empower regulators to refer potential violations to the US attorney general. In April, the Department of Justice announced the creation of a task force in Virginia to investigate whether banks have denied credit or services to customers based on “impermissible factors.”

By Sabina Mammadli