<p>Despite the popular consensus on the matter, banks probably aren't specifically Bitcoin-unfriendly.  The repeated bank problems for exchanges probably come down to three main things:</p>

<ol>
<li><strong>Automatic risk triggers</strong> -- Banks have a lot of mechanisms in place that throw up warning bells when a new customer starts moving lots of money around, is rapidly depositing and withdrawing large amounts of money, etc.  In the past, such activities have often been associated with money laundering, crime, and the sorts of things that are generally bad for business.  Even if a Bitcoin business isn't a problem, it <em>looks</em> like one to the risk algorithms.  If, over time, Bitcoin businesses prove to in fact be low-risk while driving significant business for the banks, the algorithms may be adapted to take this into account.  But they're not rewriting their risk algorithms for what is from their perspective one tiny new technology (and that's probably responsible of them).</li>
<li><strong>Regulatory compliance</strong> -- When risk triggers are activated, the first thing the bank wants to know is whether a business is fully compliant with anti-money-laundering legislation.  Many Bitcoin businesses and exchanges are, but the fact is that some aren't.  They haven't been <em>prosecuted</em> for it, but they weren't doing all the paperwork that they really should have been.  Sometimes it's not really the business owner's fault either--financial legalities can be complicated and arcane.  Nonetheless, failure to comply is a huge liability for a bank.</li>
<li><strong>Legitimate risks</strong> -- Finally, despite their volatility, bitcoins are a much "harder" currency than most bank deposits and transfers, in the sense that a bitcoin transaction can't be reversed, while bank deposits and transfers are all the time.  That means there is a massive incentive for individually shady customers to move ill-gotten gains out of the banking system and into bitcoins, and there's nothing the Bitcoin exchanges and businesses can really do about that.  This is a <strong>major</strong> risk problem for a bank, who could end up out some serious money if transferred cash is later "charged back."  At least one major bank recently has quoted risk assessments of individual customers, rather than the exchange itself, as the reason for closing an account.</li>
</ol>

<p><strong>TL;DR:</strong>  Bitcoin <em>per se</em> doesn't have as much to do with it as many people think, and in most cases all three of these issues will apply equally at <em>any</em> financial institution regardless of their personal biases, or (more likely) ignorance regarding Bitcoin itself.  <strong>So in the sense that you're asking, there may not <em>be</em> such a thing as a Bitcoin-friendly bank.</strong></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-02-07T22:00:04.937Z
not true. Bitcoin business *per se* is rejected by Wells Fargo. The Money Services Business Control Center also stated that large banks in general do not accept cryptocurrency business at this time. The service representative went on to say that smaller, local banks are a better bet for finding bitcoin-friendly banks.
zylstra
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-04-30T20:03:47.277Z
2013-05-01T05:08:13.843Z
2013-05-01T05:08:13.843Z
eMansipater
<p>The answer to the question also depends on the country. In Germany a new cooperation between the German Bitcoin exchange bitcoin.de and Fidor bank just started (read about it <a href="https://blog.bitcoin.de/en" rel="nofollow">in this blog post</a>). Apparently Fidor bank even plans to display a Euro and a Bitcoin account balance. That's as Bitcoin friendly as a bank can get I'd say.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-07-26T18:25:18.443Z
2013-07-26T18:25:18.443Z
Radoslav Albrecht
<p>There are not enough banks that have to deal with Bitcoin exchanges so you really don't have enough data yet for them to be able to say they are bitcoin friendly. What we can definitely do is do some sort of consensus of looking or questioning different banks to look into the issue, and then give their opinions on the matter. </p>

<p>I don't think individuals have to worry very much, it is the BTC businesses that are drawing large amounts of BTC that have a lot to worry about. Or the ones particularly that are an exchange.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-05-02T05:43:45.630Z
2013-05-02T05:43:45.630Z
Gaetano Cajetan
<p>In the US, I've read of two banks that have had involvement with Bitcoin exchanges - IAFCU and Silicon Valley Bank.</p>

<p>Though, there have been some recent reported issues - <a href="http://www.coindesk.com/tradehill-halts-trading-due-to-iafcu-operational-and-regulatory-issues/" rel="nofollow">http://www.coindesk.com/tradehill-halts-trading-due-to-iafcu-operational-and-regulatory-issues/</a></p>

<p>Is anyone aware of any other US banks that are Bitcoin friendly?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-09-09T02:50:05.163Z
2013-09-09T02:50:05.163Z
Bitcoin Economist
<p>As is well known many Bitcoin businesses and in particular exchanges have had a lot of trouble working with banks. Are there any banks that are explicitly Bitcoin-friendly?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-04-30T11:46:00.680Z
CoinBase and mtGox seem to work OK with banks
RentFree
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-04-30T15:52:31.457Z
With which banks?
Kinnard Hockenhull
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-04-30T17:28:26.237Z
I think they can wire most banks when doing exchanges either way
RentFree
<banks>
Bitcoin-friendly Bank
Kinnard Hockenhull
# Bitcoin-friendly Bank

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-04-30)

As is well known many username_6 businesses and in particular exchanges have had a lot of trouble working with banks. Are there any banks that are explicitly username_6-friendly?

**Tags:** banks

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: CoinBase and mtGox seem to work OK with banks  
> **username_0**: With which banks?  
> **username_1**: I think they can wire most banks when doing exchanges either way  

---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2013-04-30. Score: 2

Despite the popular consensus on the matter, banks probably aren't specifically username_6-unfriendly. The repeated bank problems for exchanges probably come down to three main things:

1. **Automatic risk triggers** -- Banks have a lot of mechanisms in place that throw up warning bells when a new customer starts moving lots of money around, is rapidly depositing and withdrawing large amounts of money, etc. In the past, such activities have often been associated with money laundering, crime, and the sorts of things that are generally bad for business. Even if a username_6 business isn't a problem, it *looks* like one to the risk algorithms. If, over time, username_6 businesses prove to in fact be low-risk while driving significant business for the banks, the algorithms may be adapted to take this into account. But they're not rewriting their risk algorithms for what is from their perspective one tiny new technology (and that's probably responsible of them).
2. **Regulatory compliance** -- When risk triggers are activated, the first thing the bank wants to know is whether a business is fully compliant with anti-money-laundering legislation. Many username_6 businesses and exchanges are, but the fact is that some aren't. They haven't been *prosecuted* for it, but they weren't doing all the paperwork that they really should have been. Sometimes it's not really the business owner's fault either--financial legalities can be complicated and arcane. Nonetheless, failure to comply is a huge liability for a bank.
3. **Legitimate risks** -- Finally, despite their volatility, bitcoins are a much "harder" currency than most bank deposits and transfers, in the sense that a username_6 transaction can't be reversed, while bank deposits and transfers are all the time. That means there is a massive incentive for individually shady customers to move ill-gotten gains out of the banking system and into bitcoins, and there's nothing the username_6 exchanges and businesses can really do about that. This is a **major** risk problem for a bank, who could end up out some serious money if transferred cash is later "charged back." At least one major bank recently has quoted risk assessments of individual customers, rather than the exchange itself, as the reason for closing an account.

**TL;DR:** username_6 *per se* doesn't have as much to do with it as many people think, and in most cases all three of these issues will apply equally at *any* financial institution regardless of their personal biases, or (more likely) ignorance regarding username_6 itself. **So in the sense that you're asking, there may not *be* such a thing as a username_6-friendly bank.**

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: not true. username_6 business *per se* is rejected by Wells Fargo. The Money Services Business Control Center also stated that large banks in general do not accept cryptocurrency business at this time. The service representative went on to say that smaller, local banks are a better bet for finding username_6-friendly banks.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2013-07-26. Score: 2

The answer to the question also depends on the country. In Germany a new cooperation between the German username_6 exchange username_6.de and Fidor bank just started (read about it [in this blog post](https://blog.username_6.de/en)). Apparently Fidor bank even plans to display a Euro and a username_6 account balance. That's as username_6 friendly as a bank can get I'd say.


---

### Answer by username_5 on 2013-05-02. Score: 0

There are not enough banks that have to deal with username_6 exchanges so you really don't have enough data yet for them to be able to say they are username_6 friendly. What we can definitely do is do some sort of consensus of looking or questioning different banks to look into the issue, and then give their opinions on the matter.

I don't think individuals have to worry very much, it is the BTC businesses that are drawing large amounts of BTC that have a lot to worry about. Or the ones particularly that are an exchange.


---

### Answer by username_6 on 2013-09-09. Score: 0

In the US, I've read of two banks that have had involvement with username_6 exchanges - IAFCU and Silicon Valley Bank.

Though, there have been some recent reported issues - <http://www.coindesk.com/tradehill-halts-trading-due-to-iafcu-operational-and-regulatory-issues/>

Is anyone aware of any other US banks that are username_6 friendly?


---

