OCC Debanking Reporting: What Religious Organizations Need to Know

Tom Witherspoon

The report, entitled “Debanked: Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,” discussed the OCC’s review of activities at the nation’s nine then-largest national banks between 2020 and September 2025.  The OCC expressed concerns with such banks’ use of reputation risk policies in decision-making regarding customer accounts.  As part of the review, the OCC asked banks to identify instances in which they applied such policies during the review period, and the OCC then reviewed samples of such instances.  While the OCC indicated such policies and practices changed during the review period to reverse such practices, it believes that issue may occur again with future administration changes.  (See Report at 5–6).

The OCC stated it was “unable to quantify on a comprehensive basis the full extent of debanking or alleged debanking actions” and further stated that the report included specific examples only from certain banks based on their level of participation in the review.  (See Report at 7).  The OCC stated that the report’s number of references “to any particular bank does not reflect its relative volume of problematic decisions or the relative extent of its overall debanking practices,” and further that the report’s findings were “not intended to represent the full scope of content reviewed or conduct identified by the agency.”  (See Report at 13).

In addition to expressing concerns about banks’ use of reputation risk policies to close customer accounts, the OCC stated that it continues to review banks’ policies and procedures to comply with money laundering and terrorist financing laws, such as the Bank Secrecy Act.  (See Report at 8).  The OCC is concerned that banks may avoid certain lawful business based on elevated risks in that regard.  The OCC’s statements and findings in the report in that regard were focused on customers conducting lawful business activities in the oil and gas, coal, firearms, detention facility, tobacco, and digital asset activities.  (Report at 27).

The OCC’s review and report was performed pursuant to the President’s Executive Order 14331, which states, in relevant part regarding religious nonprofits, that “no American should be denied access to financial services because of their constitutionally or statutorily protected beliefs, affiliations, or political reviews.”  Specifically in regard to religious issues, the Executive Order ordered federal banking regulators to “review their current supervisory and complaint data to identify any financial institution that has engaged in unlawful debanking on the basis of religion.”

The OCC found that the banks reputation risk policies were intended “to address the perception that certain customer relationships or activities could harm [the bank’s] reputation.”  (Report at 14–15).  The banks’ potential policy-based concerns included “controversial,” “unethical,” “unfair,” “improper,” or “politically charged” activities that might raise issues for the bank with the public or bank stakeholders.  

The banks maintained committees or internal escalation processes to evaluate such issues regarding customers or prospective customers.  To gather information for review, the banks would review news and other information sources.  The OCC also stated that the banks used information from advocacy organizations, as well as complaint data.  (Report at 16).

The OCC cited a number of examples of account denials or closures regarding religiously oriented issues, stating that they often involved small companies or small nonprofits:

• One bank subsidiary closed an account of a customer characterized by bank employees as a “right wing religious conservative non profit with strong anti LGBTQ rhetoric,” later described as “a conservative education and research organization,” with a mission in “promoting, protecting, and strengthening traditional family values, which include pro-life, pro-marriage and pro-family.”  (Report at 20).  

• Another bank declined a loan to a media company whose owner’s foundation “funded several Christian conservative groups, including several identified as hate groups.”  (Report at 17).  

• The OCC also found that a bank closed an account used to fund a legal challenge by a “devout Christian” regarding certain anti-discrimination laws.  (Report at 20).  

• Another bank’s third party partner terminated a nonprofit’s merchant processing account after the bank notified the partner of a website describing the nonprofit’s views on same-sex marriage, which closure the OCC found impacted the nonprofit’s ability to receive recurring electronic donations.  (Report at 21–22).  

• The OCC also found certain banks flagged (but ultimately did not take action on the basis of) customers’ (or prospective customers’) stances on “abortion, LGBTQ rights, and other social issues,” “pro-life views,” and faith-based health care sharing plan requirements.  (Report at 22).

The OCC noted in the report that during the review period several states enacted “fair access” laws beginning with Florida in 2023 that prohibited certain financial institutions in that state from denying or terminating services based on such reasons.  (Report at 34).

The OCC further stated that customers whose accounts were closed were not given meaningful explanations for the bank’s actions.  (See Report at 6).  Notifications regarding termination often cited the bank’s contractual right under its account agreement to close an account for any reason at any time, banking guidelines, operation in a business the bank does not service, best interests of the parties, or risk-based decisions.  The OCC further found that customers did not receive a better explanation when they followed up with the bank about the closure.  (Report at 37).

In response to the Executive Order and the OCC’s review, the OCC stated that the banks reported adopting, revising, or consolidating their policies.  (Report at 40).  In addition, several banks represented they had revised their reputation risk policies to not allow such risk to be the sole basis for the decision to close or deny business to a customer.  The OCC also stated that some banks had eliminated certain reputation risk policies, committees or functions.  (Report at 41).  However, the OCC reported that most banks indicated they would continue considering reputation risk in relation to “the risk of financial loss.”

Finally, regarding the OCC’s future efforts to address the issues described in the report, the OCC stated that it has updated its website to provide a portal for customers of national banks and federal savings associations to report debanking concerns.  The OCC stated that it will monitor such complaints and report on trends.  (Report at 44).  In addition, the OCC stated that it will continue to pursue changes to its authorities with respect to sharing supervisory information regarding debanking in private litigation by customers against their banks.  (Report at 45).