Crypto
Banks In The USA Should Be Permitted To Own Cryptocurrency
President Donald Trump at the 2024 Bitcoin Conference in Nashville, TN.
The world of financial services is always evolving, but recently there are signs of a seismic shift. At the heart of this transformation is the rise of cryptocurrencies. Digital assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and a host of others – including stablecoins – have moved from the fringes of the financial system to the forefront, capturing the attention of investors, regulators, and, increasingly, traditional banks. As the cryptocurrency market continues to mature, one question that is becoming increasingly urgent to answer is whether banks in the United States should be permitted to own cryptocurrencies. If banks are to remain relevant in the rapidly changing financial landscape, then participating in the cryptocurrency markets is a necessary and logical step in the evolution of banking.
A Shifting Regulatory Landscape
Since the beginning of the crypto asset class, the relationship between banks and cryptocurrencies has been fraught with tension. Regulatory uncertainty, concerns over volatility, and the perceived risks associated with digital assets have kept banks on the sidelines. Most banks have even shied away from providing any banking services to companies and individuals who had interest in the digital asset class.
However, recent developments, particularly from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), have begun to pave the way for greater bank involvement in the cryptocurrency space. On March 7, 2025, the OCC issued Interpretive Letter 1183 (IL 1183), which provided much-needed clarity on the ability of national banks to engage with cryptocurrencies. The impact of this guidance is discussed in Banks In Crypto: The OCC’s Quiet Game-Changer.
Interpretive Letter 1183 affirmed early guidance that national banks can provide cryptocurrency-related services—such as custody and trading—as long as they do so in a safe and sound manner. The original guidance, articulated in Interpretive Letter 1170 in July 2020, was never withdrawn, but for almost five years it was practically disavowed.
Although the OCC has shown a path for banks to offer cryptocurrency services, the question of direct bank ownership of cryptocurrency remains a sticking point. In a joint statement from the OCC, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and Federal Reserve in January 2023, banks were cautioned against holding public cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin on their balance sheets (read: prohibited). The restriction, rooted in concerns over risk and stability, feels increasingly out of step with the realities of the modern financial system. The OCC recognized that was time to revisit this stance, and Acting Comptroller of the Currency Rodney E. Hood announced the OCC withdrew from the joint statement. Subject to safety and soundness considerations, according to the OCC, national banks have the ability to own cryptocurrencies outright.
Bringing Trust and Stability to a Volatile Market
Perhaps the strongest argument for allowing banks to provide products and services in cryptocurrency, and to own cryptocurrencies directly, is their unique ability to bring trust and stability to a market that desperately needs it. Banks have centuries of experience managing complex financial assets, from stocks and bonds to derivatives and foreign exchange. They operate under some of the strictest regulatory frameworks in the world, with requirements for capital reserves, liquidity, and consumer protection that far exceed those of the average fintech or cryptocurrency exchange.
Consider the high-profile collapses of platforms like FTX, Celsius, Voyager, and BlockFi, which left investors reeling from billions in losses. These failures underscored the risks of operating in a largely unregulated environment. By contrast, banks offer a level of security and oversight that is unmatched in the cryptocurrency space. FDIC insurance, rigorous compliance standards, and robust risk management protocols mean that customers can engage with digital assets through a bank with far greater confidence than they can through a standalone crypto exchange or lightly regulated fintech. Allowing banks to own cryptocurrencies would leverage this infrastructure to create a safer, more reliable ecosystem for digital assets.
New Revenue Streams and Competitive Relevance
Beyond stability, there is a compelling business case for allowing banks to own and provide services in cryptocurrencies. The cryptocurrency market can no longer be considered a financial niche: it is a multi-trillion-dollar asset class that continues to attract significant capital from investors across the spectrum. Banks that can custody, trade, and hold digital assets stand to capture a share of this growing market. More importantly, engaging with cryptocurrencies will allow banks to remain competitive in an era where younger generations—millennials and Gen Z—are increasingly integrating digital assets into their financial lives.
Take custody services as an example. As institutional interest in cryptocurrencies grows, so does the demand for secure storage solutions. Banks, with their established expertise in safeguarding assets, are perfectly positioned to meet this need. If permitted to own cryptocurrencies, banks could also offer innovative products—think crypto-backed loans or yield-generating accounts—that would attract tech-savvy customers and diversify revenue streams. In a financial landscape where margins are under constant pressure and fintech and crypto-native firms are encroaching on traditional banking activities, banks cannot afford to be forced to remain sitting on the sidelines.
Managing the Risks
It goes without saying that a discussion of banks and cryptocurrencies would not be complete without addressing the question of the risks. The price of Bitcoin, the largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, has been known to swing 20% in a single day, a level of volatility that captures the attention of even seasoned risk managers. Critics have argued that by exposing banks to such fluctuations cryptocurrencies could jeopardize their stability and, by extension, the broader financial system. It is a fair concern—but one that overlooks and does not give appropriate credit to the proven ability of the banking industry to manage volatile assets.
Banks already navigate turbulent markets like foreign exchange and commodities with sophisticated tools: diversification, hedging strategies, and strict exposure limits. Applying these same principles to cryptocurrencies is both feasible and practical. Banks could further mitigate risks by focusing on well-established digital assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum, which have already been designated digital commodities. The cryptocurrencies with significant market capitalizations also offer greater liquidity and resilience than newer, untested tokens. With proper regulatory guardrails—such as capital requirements tailored to crypto holdings—the risks can be managed effectively.
The Need for Regulatory Clarity
Regulatory clarity is traditionally the strength of the financial markets in the USA, and one of the reasons that the capital markets are the largest in the world. The American banking system is the engine for growth for the greater economy, and that engine does not function well when there is uncertainty. The OCC Interpretive Letter 1183 is a giant step forward, but the OCC does not have the authority to address bank ownership of cryptocurrencies on their own. With the newly reasserted OCC guidance, the 2023 joint statement from federal regulators creates a contradictory message: banks can engage with cryptocurrencies, but they cannot fully participate. This ambiguity will continue to stifle innovation and will leave banks uncertain about how to proceed, or whether they are permitted to proceed at all.
What is needed is a clear, consistent framework that allows banks to own cryptocurrencies and provide customers with products and services all while ensuring safety and soundness. The OCC, FDIC, and Federal Reserve should work together to update their guidance, drawing on lessons from the past decade of cryptocurrency evolution. Clear rules would not only protect consumers but also give banks the confidence to invest in the infrastructure—including blockchain integration and cybersecurity—needed to support digital asset ownership.
A Modern Financial System
Finally, the benefits of bank-owned cryptocurrencies extend beyond the institutions themselves. The broader financial system stands to gain from the modernization that digital assets can bring. Blockchain technology, which underpins cryptocurrencies, offers the potential to streamline cross-border payments, reduce transaction costs, and push financial institutions to move towards true round-the-clock operations. Banks, with their vast networks and customer bases, are ideally positioned to drive these innovations forward. By owning and integrating cryptocurrencies into their operations, banks can bridge the gap between traditional finance and the emerging digital economy.
Banks also cannot afford to be left behind from the growth in the use of stablecoins. Customer expectations are growing for the modernization of the payment infrastructure. Traditional payment rails are not enough, and customers are demanding alternatives. If banks are not involved in the innovation of stablecoins then banks risk fintech companies completely usurping their role in the space.
The Path Forward
The cryptocurrency revolution is here to stay, and banks must be allowed to play a central role in shaping the future. The recent guidance from the OCC is both a positive regulatory signal and a move in the right direction, but it is only the beginning of what is required. Permitting banks to own cryptocurrencies would harness their expertise to bring trust and stability to the market, unlock new opportunities for growth, and modernize the financial system for the digital age. The active involvement of banks will help ensure that the volatility is in the asset, and not in the stability of the financial institutions providing cryptocurrency services to customers. The risks are real, but they are manageable—and the rewards far outweigh them. It is time for regulators to take the next step and let banks join the crypto revolution in full. The future of finance depends on it.
Pig butchering scams do not start with crypto. They start with a conversation. Someone reaches out through a dating app, a text, or social media, and over weeks or months they build what feels like a genuine connection. They ask about your life and your goals.
At some point they mention a crypto platform that has been generating strong returns. They help you set up an account, walk you through the first deposit, and show you a dashboard with what looks like real profit. You put in more. The numbers climb. Then the platform locks you out or disappears, and the money is gone.
If this has happened to you, the most important thing is to move quickly. A crypto fraud lawyer can help you figure out what to do next and which legal options may still be available.
Immediate Steps After Discovering the Scam
Scammers count on the shock to buy them time. Most victims spend the first few days trying to understand what happened instead of acting, and that delay allows evidence to disappear and funds to move further out of reach.
The First 72 Hours
The first three days matter more than most people realize. Scammers do not sit still after taking money. They rotate wallet addresses, shut down platforms, and often keep pressuring the victim to send more under the guise of fees or tax payments needed to release returns that never existed.
Getting a lawyer involved early can cut through the confusion. They identify which wallets and platforms were involved, send notices to banks and exchanges, and start building a timeline while everything is still fresh. The window for certain recovery options is narrow, and even a week of delay can close off paths that were open on day one.
Securing Accounts and Devices
While the legal side gets underway, lock down every account you have access to. Change your passwords, enable two-factor authentication, and scan your devices for remote access software that scammers sometimes install during the setup process. Check your email for forwarding rules you did not set up, and review your exchange accounts for linked addresses or withdrawal settings that were changed without your knowledge.
Do this before making any further transfers.
Building the Record
Crypto transactions leave a trail, but the window for capturing it closes quickly. Exchanges update their interfaces, chat platforms delete messages, and fake investment sites go offline without notice.
Preserving Transaction Evidence
Everything from this point forward depends on what you can document. Wallet addresses, transaction IDs, exchange account statements, screenshots of every conversation with the scammer (including the early ones), wire transfer receipts, credit card statements, deposit instructions, and dashboard screenshots from the fake platform (if you can still access it).
Get it together as early as you can. Messages will disappear. Platforms will go offline. Access will be revoked without warning. The picture you can put together on day three is going to be much more complete than anything you will be able to reconstruct a month from now.
Store copies in two separate places. A secure cloud folder and a local drive is a simple setup that works. Put together a log that records dates, times, amounts, and whatever names or identifiers were displayed on each platform. Organized records make everything easier for lawyers, investigators, and financial institutions.
Coordinating With Financial Platforms
Banks, credit card companies, and crypto exchanges may be able to freeze funds, flag suspicious wallet addresses, or open internal investigations. These processes tend to work better when the request comes in early, includes specific transaction details, and is submitted in writing. Vague complaints filed weeks later are much easier for them to dismiss.
Save the name of whoever you speak to, the reference number, and a summary of what was said. Keep copies of all emails and chat logs. This creates an audit trail that becomes important if a dispute escalates.
Recognizing Follow-Up Scams
This is the part that catches people off guard. After the initial loss, a second wave often follows.
Someone contacts you claiming to be a recovery specialist, a government agent, or a tax official who can help get your money back. But first they need a fee, or your private keys, or a small crypto payment for verification purposes.
None of it is real. Scammers know that victims at this stage are desperate, and they use that against them. Some resort to threats. Others try to isolate the victim from family or friends who might step in and encourage reporting.
Treat any unsolicited contact about recovering your funds as a potential threat until it has been independently verified. Any request for upfront payment is a warning sign, without exception.
Legal Paths Forward
Most victims expect law enforcement to handle recovery. Criminal investigations into crypto fraud tend to move slowly and rarely focus on individual cases. Civil options often provide more direct paths, but they come with deadlines that can expire faster than people expect.
Deadlines and Leverage
Legal remedies in crypto fraud cases are not open-ended. Payment dispute windows have fixed deadlines. Statutes of limitations run on a set schedule. Certain contractual claims expire within weeks, not months. The longer someone waits, the fewer options remain.
An early legal review can identify which of these deadlines apply and which ones are coming up fast. Credit card chargebacks, for example, have to be filed within a defined window. Certain claims against exchanges operate under similar constraints.
Timing also affects leverage. A demand letter backed by organized records and documented losses will be taken more seriously than a vague complaint filed months later. When the other side can see the case is well-prepared, negotiations tend to move forward more quickly.
Civil Options
Filing a police report is a good idea. It creates an official record and supports the timeline of events. But criminal investigations into crypto fraud are often slow and focused on larger networks. Direct results for any single victim can take a long time to secure, if they come at all.
Civil claims work on a separate track.
Bitcoin Tumbles Amid U.S.-Iran Clashes
Bitcoin tumbled to the $62,000 range Monday as a weekend exchange of gunfire between U.S. and Iranian forces threatened to spark another energy crisis. Market data showed the top cryptocurrency plunged from a 24-hour peak of $64,385 late Sunday to $62,037 by 10:15 a.m. EST Monday.
While the cryptocurrency attempted to reclaim the $63,000 resistance level, another sell-off saw it retreat to $62,200, reversing earlier gains and leaving it down nearly 3%. The decline dragged its market capitalization down from $1.28 trillion to approximately $1.25 trillion as of 12:40 p.m. EST. The slide, in turn, helped trim the crypto economy’s aggregate market capitalization to $2.24 trillion.
Meanwhile, the slide triggered the liquidation of $83 million in long leveraged positions and $12 million in shorts. Overall, liquidations across the crypto economy topped $322 million, with liquidated long bets accounting for $267 million of the total.
Following earlier strikes in the week, the U.S. military upped the ante Sunday, striking more than 100 targets across Iran. The U.S. maintains the strikes were in response to Iranian attacks on shipping vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz. In addition to the strikes, some media reports suggested the U.S. military was contemplating a blockade on Iranian ports.
Iran, which rejects the allegations, launched retaliatory strikes targeting U.S. bases and installations across five Gulf countries, including Qatar and Tehran’s ally Oman. Iran insists Washington is violating a memorandum of understanding (MoU).
The apparent return to full combat operations came days after U.S. President Donald Trump declared the ceasefire between the two sides over. The U.S. leader also accused Tehran of violating the terms of the MoU, which requires Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
Following the latest escalation, oil prices jumped 4.5%, with the global benchmark Brent crude breaching the $80-per-barrel mark. According to analysts, market concern is expanding beyond crude oil prices, with investors increasingly focused on disruptions to global refining capacity and fuel supply chains. Ongoing conflicts have affected refinery operations across the Middle East and, recently, key global shipping routes in the Russia-Ukraine region.
“Even if crude oil prices stabilize, gasoline and diesel prices could remain elevated due to limited refined fuel availability. This creates a risk that energy inflation may prove more persistent than markets currently anticipate,” a Bitunix analyst asserted in a recent report.
For global markets, including crypto, the central question for this week extends beyond whether U.S. inflation rises again. The bigger issue is whether global capital costs continue moving higher.
With AI investment absorbing significant funding, energy supply chains facing uncertainty, and Federal Reserve policy remaining unsettled, risk assets are likely to remain driven by the interaction among interest rates, liquidity conditions and corporate financing costs.
“For bitcoin, reclaiming and holding above $64,000 could improve short-term momentum. However, continued pressure from higher capital costs may keep BTC trapped within a broader consolidation range,” the analyst said.
Crypto
The Tech Billionaire Takeover review – a surprisingly fun look at the crypto bros threatening democracy
Matt Shea’s documentary is bookended by two stark facts. One is that the wealth of the world’s 12 richest people is equal to that of the poorest 50% of humanity (you can argue about whether 12 is exactly right, but it’s certainly a horrifyingly small number). The other is that in recent US election cycles, the fossil fuel industry has been replaced as the biggest political donor by a new force: cryptocurrency.
In an hour that manages to be more entertaining than terrifying despite sailing into very murky waters, Shea explores how a fresh breed of tech billionaires are looking to make a bold new move. He shows that in a traditional western democracy, the principle that citizens all have an equal vote and are all equally beholden to the law is heavily compromised by a tiny minority of rich citizens. These people influence what the electorate votes for, by bankrolling politicians and owning media companies, as well as using their wealth to ensure rules do not properly apply to them. But plutocrats still find this system frustrating, thanks to those pesky elections and that annoying rule of law. What’s next?
Shea meets people who have made silly amounts of wonga from cryptocurrency – a sector that claims to be dedicated to freedom and transparency, but is notoriously resistant to proper accountability. First, he observes as Justin Sun, a Chinese tech entrepreneur with personal wealth of around $8.5bn, gets his crypto trading network Tron listed on Nasdaq without going through the standard process of listing the company, via a “reverse merger” with a failing company. That is to say, he buys the business – which is already listed – and changes its name to Tron Inc.
That’s all perfectly legal and not too remarkable, but soon we’re off to a muddy peninsula in the Danube between Croatia and Serbia. This has been claimed by crypto bros as Liberland, a “micronation” that will supposedly become a hi-tech utopia where no tax is paid and regulatory red tape is eliminated. At the moment, though, it’s a few tents that are regularly raided by Croatian police, who disagree about the land having no pre-existing owner.
Shea meets the president, a man named Vit Jedlicka who tries and fails to control what his acolytes talk to the film-maker about. One of them escapes for a one-on-one with Shea, where he stumbles as he attempts to counter the argument that Liberland’s electoral system, under which the purchase of more crypto “merits” gives you more voting power, means its version of liberty is available to relatively few people. The elected prime minister of Liberland? Justin Sun.
At this point Shea is jousting for fun with weirdos, as he is when he talks to the writer Curtis Yarvin, who believes democratic governments are inferior to rule via corporate boards headed up by CEO “monarchs”. The programme gets wackier still when Shea arrives in Singapore for Token 2049, a conference for people who believe crypto is the future and governments can’t be trusted. A man with bitcoin logos all over his suit babbles something about a “new world order” imminently implementing a satanic global dominion.
There’s more fun and games as Shea tours the crypto-themed stands, but one of the main sponsors of the event is Tron, and the keynote speaker is Donald Trump Jr. He’s there on behalf of World Liberty Financial, the crypto company co-founded by the Trump family, who are estimated to have made more than $2bn from their various cryptocurrency ventures. Several investors in World Liberty – among them Justin Sun, before he spectacularly fell out with the Trumps – have subsequently benefited from favourable legal or regulatory decisions by the US government. Trump has denied any link between investments in his family companies and government decisions affecting the investors. His representative calls it: “the same, tired narrative that Democrats have pushed … for a decade. … There are no conflicts of interest.” When Shea raises the issue with Sun, a PR adviser heckles from behind the camera and shuts the question down.
Here is where Shea’s thesis falters slightly. Replacing governments with digital hegemonies might make sense to crypto billionaires, who don’t have to worry about things a functional society offers such as reliable physical infrastructure or a healthy workforce, because they just want machines to turn their money into more money. But taking over countries, or setting up new ones, is unnecessary for now thanks to the Trump regime. There’s no need to form your own government if the current US administration already offers frictionless routes to even greater wealth.
Either way, though, none of this is good and all of it is to be monitored, albeit probably from a position of helpless impotence. The rich keep getting richer and the powerful keep finding ways to help them do it.
-
Videos54 minutes agoNew explosions near Iranian port cities, says state media | BBC News
-
Los Angeles, Ca55 minutes agoBig rig crash spills cinder blocks on 101 Freeway; lanes blocked in Tarzana
-
Detroit, MI1 hour agoHow to watch ‘The Odyssey’ in IMAX, 70mm and more in metro Detroit
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoSold-Out SF Marathon 2026: The Races, Routes and Road Closures (Plus How to Watch It All) | KQED
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoTop 10 Dallas Cowboys of 2026: Rashan Gary is Complete EDGE Dallas Needed
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoGirl, 12, shot while sitting in parked car in northwest Miami-Dade, deputies say
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoGBH Daily: Come sail away
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoNew ice cream shop with a ‘waffle theater’ bets big on downtown Denver
