UK Lawmakers Challenge Banks Over Crypto Access in 2026

Key Points

• The UK government has asked big financial institutions and banking services to clarify their treatment of cryptocurrencies and digital asset firms.
• The letter was sent by Gurinder Singh Josan MP and Lord Vaizey of Didcot, both of whom are Co-Chairs of the Crypto and Digital Assets All-Party Parliamentary Group.
• The lawmakers wish that banks would inform cryptocurrency companies whether they do or they don’t provide accounts and the reasons why applications might be denied.
• Banks are also being requested to clarify any restrictions and controls on payments imposed on businesses involved in cryptocurrencies.
• The inquiry is looking at so-called ‘one-size-fits-all’ policies in banks and whether they are proportionate and risk-based.
• The lack of banking access may be one of the biggest hurdles for UK crypto businesses to overcome, warned the APPG.
• The group stated that restrictions on banking could jeopardise the effectiveness of the UK’s upcoming crypto regulation.
• Earlier, Economic Secretary to the Treasury Lucy Rigby had noted that crypto companies that are authorised by the FCA shouldn’t be restricted due to the sector they work in.
• The parliamentary inquiry on access to Crypto Banking began on 21 July 2026.
• Written evidence from banks, payment companies, crypto businesses, regulators and others will be received until 31 August 2026.
• Inquiries of exchanges, custodians, payment companies, wallet providers, tokenisation companies and stablecoin issuers.
• UK Government with recommendations for action based on the evidence.

Westminster (Britain Today News) August 13, 2026: UK lawmakers have written to the chief executives of major banks and banking service providers, demanding explanations about account access, payment restrictions and policies affecting cryptocurrency and digital asset businesses.

The letter was signed by the APPG’s co-chairs, Labour MP Gurinder Singh Josan and Lord Vaizey of Didcot. It forms part of a parliamentary inquiry into whether banks are creating unnecessary barriers for legitimate crypto businesses operating in the United Kingdom. The APPG launched the inquiry on 21 July and is collecting written evidence until 31 August 2026.

Why are UK lawmakers questioning banks?

The APPG’s intervention follows repeated concerns from crypto and digital asset businesses that they have struggled to open or maintain bank accounts in the UK.

Some companies have also reported difficulties accessing payment services and other banking facilities needed to operate. The lawmakers said they had received reports of banks limiting or restricting payments connected to crypto companies, exchanges and other digital asset platforms.

In their letter, Josan and Vaizey asked bank executives to set out their current approach to the sector. They want lenders to explain whether they provide accounts to crypto businesses, what conditions apply and why some firms may be refused access.

The letter also asks banks to identify the factors behind their decisions, including regulatory, legal, compliance, commercial and risk considerations. The questions are intended to establish whether banks apply blanket restrictions to businesses because they operate in the crypto sector, rather than assessing each company separately.

The APPG has said its investigation is not intended to remove safeguards or weaken the duties imposed on financial institutions. Instead, it is examining whether existing restrictions are justified, transparent and proportionate.

What did the APPG ask banks to disclose?

The lawmakers have asked banks and banking service providers to address several issues connected with crypto access.

They want banks to explain:

• Whether they currently offer business accounts to crypto and digital asset firms.
• What criteria they use when assessing applications from crypto companies.
• Why an application may be rejected, or an existing account may be closed.
• Whether limits are imposed on crypto-related payments or transfers.
• What legal, regulatory, compliance, commercial and risk factors shape those policies.
• Whether their approach will change when the UK’s new crypto regulatory framework takes effect.
• What action the Government or regulators could take to improve access to financial services.

The questions cover the practical services businesses require, including bank accounts, payment facilities, merchant services and related financial infrastructure.

For a crypto company, losing access to a bank account can affect payroll, tax payments, supplier contracts, customer transactions and the ability to maintain ordinary business operations. The APPG is therefore examining banking access as a wider business and competitiveness issue, rather than as a narrow dispute between financial institutions and cryptocurrency firms.

The inquiry will also consider the treatment of associated professional services, including companies that support the digital asset sector. The APPG’s call for evidence refers to concerns involving banking services and restrictions on crypto-related transactions.

How serious is the banking barrier?

The APPG described access to banking services as potentially one of the largest obstacles facing the UK’s crypto and digital asset sector.

“Access to banking services could be one of the single biggest barriers to growth for U.K. crypto and digital asset businesses, and could potentially undermine the success of the U.K.’s forthcoming crypto regime,”

The lawmakers wrote in their letter.

The warning reflects a wider concern within the industry. Even if companies meet the requirements of a new regulatory system, they may still find it difficult to obtain the banking services required to trade and expand.

The lawmakers argue that regulation and banking access must work together. A licensing system may provide formal recognition and stronger oversight, but its effectiveness could be reduced if authorised businesses remain unable to access payment networks or maintain relationships with mainstream banks.

The APPG is assessing the scale of the problem, its effect on investment and growth, and whether the issue is damaging competition. It is also seeking evidence about how banking restrictions affect consumers and legitimate businesses.

The group has said it wants to distinguish between appropriate controls designed to prevent fraud, scams and financial crime, and broad policies that exclude firms solely because they work with cryptoassets.

What has Lucy Rigby said about crypto banking?

Economic Secretary to the Treasury Lucy Rigby has previously expressed a position similar to that of the APPG.

In comments to Parliament earlier in 2026, Rigby said the Government would not expect FCA-authorised crypto firms to be restricted by banking service providers simply because of the sector in which they operate.

“Under the UK’s new crypto regime, firms will need to be licensed by the FCA to provide relevant cryptoasset services, and the Government would not expect such licensed firms to be subject to restrictions by banking service providers simply because of the sector they belong to.”

Rigby said, according to reporting on the parliamentary position.

Her comments are significant because they indicate that authorisation by the Financial Conduct Authority is expected to carry practical importance. If a company has met the regulator’s requirements, lawmakers believe banks should consider its specific risk profile instead of automatically applying sector-wide restrictions.

However, Rigby’s position does not mean banks will be required to accept every crypto business. Banks will continue to assess customers under anti-money laundering, consumer protection and financial crime rules.

The issue being examined is whether those obligations are being applied consistently and fairly. The APPG is asking banks to explain how they balance their regulatory responsibilities with the need to provide services to legitimate, authorised businesses.

Why does the forthcoming UK regime matter?

The inquiry comes as the United Kingdom attempts to establish clearer rules for the crypto and digital asset industry.

Under the emerging framework, crypto companies providing relevant services will be expected to meet formal regulatory requirements. The Financial Conduct Authority is set to play a central role in supervising firms that offer services linked to buying, selling, trading and holding cryptoassets.

The regulatory changes are intended to improve consumer protection, strengthen transparency and provide a cleaner operating environment for businesses. The Government has also presented the framework as part of an effort to make the UK an attractive destination for digital asset investment and innovation.

The timing of the banking inquiry is therefore important. Lawmakers are concerned that the UK could introduce a formal licensing system without resolving the practical problems companies face when trying to open bank accounts or process payments.

The APPG believes that a successful regulatory regime must provide more than legal clarity. Businesses must also be able to access the financial services needed to function. Without that access, companies may move operations abroad, delay investment or struggle to compete with firms in other markets.

Which crypto businesses are covered by the inquiry?

The APPG’s investigation covers a broad range of businesses operating in the digital asset economy.

The companies within its scope include:

• Cryptocurrency exchanges.
• Digital asset custodians.
• Crypto payment firms.
• Wallet providers.
• Tokenisation businesses.
• Stablecoin issuers.
• Companies offering related financial and professional services.

Each category may face different banking requirements and risk considerations. An exchange processing large numbers of customer transactions may present a different risk profile from a technology company developing tokenisation software. A stablecoin issuer may require different financial services from a wallet provider or custodian.

The lawmakers are seeking evidence that banks take those differences into account.

The focus on individual risk is central to the inquiry. In their letter, the APPG argued that banking decisions should increasingly reflect individual risk.

“a firm’s individual risk profile, rather than simply the sector in which it operates.”

That approach would not prevent banks from rejecting applications where they identify unacceptable risks. It would, however, require decisions to be based on the characteristics and controls of individual companies rather than on a general policy against crypto-related businesses.

What restrictions have crypto firms reported?

The APPG said it had repeatedly heard that crypto companies had struggled to open bank accounts or keep existing accounts active.

It also received reports of banks imposing restrictions on payments and transactions connected with digital assets. Such restrictions may include limits on transfers, blocks on payments to certain crypto businesses or additional checks on transactions involving exchanges and related service providers.

The inquiry is examining how these measures are applied and whether they are proportionate.

For businesses, payment restrictions can create operational uncertainty. A company may have customers who cannot transfer funds, suppliers who cannot be paid promptly or difficulty moving money between regulated financial institutions. Repeated delays may also affect a firm’s reputation and its ability to demonstrate reliability to investors and commercial partners.

The APPG is seeking information from banks, payment providers, crypto companies, regulators, trade associations and consumer groups. This wider evidence base is intended to show how restrictions affect different parts of the market.

The inquiry will also consider examples of good practice and potential solutions. The group is not examining only the existence of restrictions but also the reasons for them, the way they are communicated and their consequences for businesses and consumers.

Are banks allowed to restrict crypto transactions?

Banks remain subject to legal and regulatory duties that require them to manage financial crime, money laundering, fraud and consumer protection risks.

The APPG acknowledged that lenders must meet those obligations. It did not argue that crypto companies should receive unrestricted access to banking services regardless of their activities or controls.

Instead, the lawmakers questioned whether broad restrictions should remain in place after companies become authorised under the new framework. The key issue is whether regulated firms should continue to be treated as inherently unsuitable for banking services.

Banks are likely to consider factors such as ownership structures, customer due diligence, transaction monitoring, geographic exposure, business models and the risk of fraud or sanctions breaches. They may also assess whether a company has adequate compliance systems and whether its activities fall within the relevant regulatory perimeter.

The APPG wants banks to explain those considerations publicly to the extent possible. Greater transparency could help businesses understand why applications are rejected or why certain transaction limits are imposed.

The inquiry does not predetermine the outcome. Its purpose is to gather evidence before deciding whether further government or regulatory intervention is required.

How could banking access affect UK investment?

Limited banking access could affect the UK’s ability to attract investment into digital assets and financial technology.

Crypto companies need ordinary financial services to recruit staff, pay taxes, lease offices, manage suppliers and serve customers. If those services are difficult to obtain, investors may regard the UK as a less reliable base for expansion.

Lawmakers are also examining the potential effect on innovation and competition. Smaller businesses may be particularly vulnerable because they often have fewer banking relationships and less capacity to absorb payment delays or account closures.

A restrictive environment could favour large established firms over new entrants. It could also encourage companies to establish operations in jurisdictions where regulated digital asset businesses can access banking services more easily.

The APPG has indicated that it will consider international approaches, including developments in the United States, Australia, Hong Kong and the European Union. The objective is to identify lessons that could help shape UK policy while preserving safeguards against financial crime.

The issue also has implications for consumers. If legitimate firms cannot access banking services, consumers may have fewer regulated choices when buying, holding or transferring digital assets. Conversely, weak controls could expose consumers to greater risks. The challenge for policymakers is to support lawful competition without reducing protections.
Explore More about Politics:
UK Government Blocks Release of Files on Israeli Firm BlackCore Over Scottish Election Meddling Claims 2026
King’s Union Secures College Chapel for Weekly Student Debates

What happens after the evidence deadline?

Written evidence for the inquiry is being accepted until 31 August 2026.

The APPG has invited submissions from banks, payment service providers, crypto and digital asset businesses, regulators, trade associations, consumer groups and other stakeholders with relevant information.

Once the submission period closes, the group is expected to review the evidence and assess the scale of the barriers. It will then prepare findings and recommendations for the Government.

The inquiry may help determine whether banks need to change their policies, whether regulators should issue additional guidance or whether legislation is required. It could also influence how the forthcoming crypto regime is implemented in practice.

The APPG’s recommendations will not automatically become law. However, the group’s cross-party composition gives the inquiry political significance, particularly as the UK seeks to balance financial stability, consumer protection and technological innovation.

The responses from banks will be particularly important. Lawmakers want direct explanations of current policies, the reasons for account refusals and transaction limits, and the likely effect of FCA authorisation on future decisions.

Could the inquiry change UK crypto policy?

The parliamentary investigation could shape the debate over how regulated crypto companies should interact with the traditional banking system.

If the evidence shows that authorised firms are being denied services solely because they operate in the digital asset sector, lawmakers may call for stronger protections or clearer regulatory expectations. If banks demonstrate that restrictions are based on specific risks and consistent compliance standards, the debate may focus instead on transparency and communication.

The outcome will also depend on the Government’s wider regulatory objectives. Ministers want to promote growth and investment, but they must ensure that the financial system is protected from money laundering, fraud, scams and other forms of abuse.

For the crypto industry, the inquiry provides an opportunity to present evidence about the practical consequences of account closures, payment limits and delayed applications. For banks, it offers an opportunity to explain the risks they identify and the controls they expect businesses to maintain.

The immediate question is whether the United Kingdom can create a regulatory framework that is both credible and commercially workable. The APPG’s letter suggests that lawmakers believe formal authorisation will have limited value if compliant firms cannot access essential banking services.

The responses received by 31 August will help determine whether the problem is isolated, widespread or linked to broader weaknesses in the UK’s approach to digital asset regulation.