TLDR
- UK banks blocked 40% of crypto payments, intensifying debanking pressure.
- Crypto exchanges face rising payment failures and shrinking UK market access.
- Widespread debanking disrupts users, slows growth, and erodes trust.
- Industry urges regulators to stop blanket banking bans on crypto firms.
- Persistent payment blocks risk pushing crypto innovation out of the UK.
UK banks intensified transaction controls on digital asset platforms, and exchanges reported widespread debanking across major payment channels. The new survey indicated that banks obstructed nearly 40% of transfers to regulated crypto exchanges. The findings suggested that restrictive policies now shape the UK’s evolving digital asset market.
Rising Barriers Across the Banking System
Major exchanges reported broad payment disruption, and many warned that persistent debanking now restricts customer activity across the UK. The survey confirmed growing delays and blocks on both bank transfers and card payments. Platforms stated that these barriers hinder normal operations and reduce user confidence.
The report also showed that 80% of exchanges experienced rising payment issues, and none reported improvement. Firms observed that the banking environment had grown more restrictive during the past year. Several platforms noted a shift away from the UK due to sustained debanking pressure.
One exchange recorded close to £1 billion in declined transactions and it linked the figure to bank-side rejections. This highlighted the scale of friction created by blocked or limited payments. As a result, platforms argued that debanking significantly slows sector expansion and affects long-term planning.
Opaque Restrictions and Expanding Legal Concerns
Banks maintained strict limits or full blocks on many transfers, and exchanges described the practices as inconsistent. Firms reported that rules applied even to FCA-registered entities despite existing compliance structures. Debanking created uncertainty for platforms seeking predictable payment flows.
The survey emphasized a lack of transparency, and all exchanges confirmed that banks rarely explained blocked transfers. This left users without clarity and forced platforms to manage increasing support burdens. The absence of clear communication deepened concerns about discretionary debanking across high-street institutions.
Traditional banks introduced restrictive caps and several challenger banks enforced outright bans. These measures continued despite the regulatory transition under the Financial Services and Markets Act. Therefore, the council warned that blanket debanking may conflict with UK competition rules and payment regulations.
Industry Push for Case-by-Case Oversight
The UK Cryptoasset Business Council urged regulators to enforce existing obligations, and it pressed for risk-based assessments. It argued that debanking should not occur without individual review because it distorts market access. The group stated that registered exchanges require fair operational conditions.
The council proposed structured engagement between banks, regulators, and digital asset platforms. This approach would allow firms to share fraud data while reducing reliance on blanket debanking policies. The recommendations called for frameworks that recognise different operational models across exchanges.
Regulators continued preparing the UK’s new cryptoasset regime, and the FCA advanced work on final rules. Yet exchanges argued that progress in rulemaking does not offset rising debanking challenges. Overall, the report said that unchecked debanking weakens domestic innovation and shifts activity to other markets.
