Donald Trump has claimed that two of the largest American banks, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, refused to accept his business, intensifying a debate over whether major financial institutions are discriminating against conservative clients for political reasons.

Speaking on CNBC, Trump said he was told by JPMorgan Chase that he had 20 days to move “hundreds of millions of dollars in cash” elsewhere. “I was loaded up with cash and they told me, ‘I’m sorry, sir, we can’t have you. You have 20 days to get out’. I said, ‘You’ve got to be kidding. I’ve been with you for 35, 40 years’,” Trump recounted in the interview.

He added that after approaching Bank of America to deposit “a billion dollars-plus”, he was refused an account. “Brian [Moynihan, Bank of America’s chief executive officer] was kissing my ass when I was president,” Trump remarked. “And he said, ‘We can’t do it. No, we can’t do it’. So I went to another one, another one, another one. I ended up going to small banks all over the place.”

The banks’ decisions come as some conservatives, cryptocurrency executives and religious groups allege they have been “de-banked” on ideological grounds. Banks, however, insist that account closures are not politically motivated, but rather the result of compliance with regulations surrounding “politically exposed people” and industries considered higher risk, such as cryptocurrency. “We don’t close accounts for political reasons, and we agree with President Trump that regulatory change is desperately needed,” a JPMorgan spokesperson said. “We commend the White House for addressing this issue and look forward to working with them to get this right.”

Bank of America did not immediately respond to requests for comment, but its chief executive officer, Brian Moynihan, later told CNBC, “We bank everybody, but the reality is, we want to make sure that the rules and regulations don’t cause decisions we make that then are looked at in the aftermath and questioned.”

The White House is reportedly preparing an executive order that would direct bank regulators to investigate whether banks are unlawfully discriminating against customers. The Bank Policy Institute, a nonpartisan public policy, research, and advocacy organisation based in Washington, D.C., “The heart of the problem is regulatory over-reach and supervisory discretion,” and expressed hope that regulators would address what it sees as a flawed framework.

The controversy over account closures is not limited to the US. In the UK, a high-profile case emerged in 2023 when Coutts, the private banking arm of NatWest Group, closed the accounts of Reform UK leader Nigel Farage. The closure, initially attributed to commercial reasons, was later revealed to have been influenced by concerns over Farage’s political views.

Internal documents showed that Coutts’ reputational risk committee discussed his stance, describing him as “pandering to racists” and a “disingenuous grifter”. The fallout led to the resignation of Dame Alison Rose, NatWest’s chief executive officer, after she admitted to a “serious error of judgment” in discussing Farage’s account with a journalist.

The incident ignited a national debate on freedom of speech in banking and prompted the UK government to propose new legislation requiring banks to provide three months’ notice and a detailed explanation before closing customer accounts.

---