FDIC says it does not 'debank' crypto firms; April 2022 letters sought disclosure and sometimes asked banks to pause activity

When asked about recent FOIA‑released documents and public allegations that regulators were pressuring banks to sever ties with crypto companies, FDIC Chair Martin Gruenberg told reporters the agency does not "debank" crypto firms with respect to deposit relationships.

"First, the FDIC does not, de bank, crypto firms in terms of their, depository relationships," Gruenberg said. He added that as long as a bank complies with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements it is "neither prohibited nor discouraged from serving any customer."

Gruenberg acknowledged that banks' engagement in crypto‑asset activity — whether on or off their balance sheets — has been a subject of supervisory attention by the three banking agencies because such activities "can raise safety and soundness, consumer protection, and money‑laundering issues." He said the agencies have issued guidance addressing those risks.

Responding to a question about a partially redacted FDIC letter released under FOIA that some readers interpreted as asking banks to "pause all crypto‑asset related activity," Gruenberg placed the letter in context. He said the FDIC issued a public financial‑institution letter in April 2022 asking supervised banks to inform the agency if they were engaging in or planning to engage in crypto‑asset activity so the FDIC could understand the nature of such activities and provide supervisory feedback. "In some cases we asked them to pause the activity to give us some time" to provide that feedback, he said, adding that the intent was supervisory assessment rather than prohibiting deposit relationships.

When a reporter pressed whether supervisory feedback could be read by banks as a warning to stop doing business with crypto firms, Gruenberg reiterated the distinction: deposit accounts present no supervisory ban, while specific crypto‑asset activities present prudential and compliance risks that require oversight and, in some cases, temporary pauses.

Gruenberg said the FDIC provided letters and follow‑up feedback to institutions based on the information banks supplied in response to the 2022 request. He framed those steps as information‑gathering and supervisory guidance rather than an effort to shut off access to deposit services.