Nigel Farage has called on MPs to hold an inquiry into NatWest after one of the group’s banks, Coutts, closed his account.
The former UKIP and Brexit Party leader has claimed the elite bank took the action because his views did not align with the firm’s “values”.
But other media reports suggested it was down to his finances not reaching the company’s threshold, and Coutts insistedit did not close accounts “solely on the basis of legally held political and personal views”.
Earlier, the chief executive officer of NatWest, Alison Rose, wrote to Mr Farage offering him an apology, after he claimed to have a 40-page document that proved Coutts “exited” him because he was regarded as “xenophobic and racist” and a former “fascist”.
In the letter, she said “deeply inappropriate comments” had been made about him in documents prepared for the company’s wealth committee, and the remarks “did not reflect the view of the bank”.
She added: “I believe very strongly that freedom of expression and access to banking are fundamental to our society and it is absolutely not our policy to exit a customer on the basis of legally held political and personal views.”
The bank has now offered “alternative banking arrangements” at NatWest.
More from UK
Speaking to reporters on Thursday night, Mr Farage called the apology “a start, but it is no way near enough”.
“It is always good to get an apology, particularly from somebody running a bank with 19 million customers, so thank you for the apology,” he added. “But it does feel ever so slightly forced.
Advertisement
“It also felt a bit like, ‘not me guv’.”
Image: The apology letter written to Nigel Farage
The letter came as the Treasury announced new stricter measures on banks closing accounts to protect freedom of expression.
The government said the organisations will now have to inform customers of the reasons why they are closing accounts, and extend the notice period from 30 days to 90 – giving customers more time to challenge the decision or find a new bank.
Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Andrew Griffith, said: “Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of our democracy, and it must be respected by all institutions.
“Banks occupy a privileged place in society, and it is right that we fairly balance the rights of banks to act in their commercial interest, with the right for everyone to express themselves freely.”
Mr Farage praised the “superb” and “rapid reaction” of the government. But he also claimed his apology from Ms Rose only came about due to pressure from the Treasury.
The now-TV presenter added that wanted to know “what was said at a dinner” between Ms Rose and a BBC journalist.
Sky News has contacted Coutts and Mr Farage for comment.
Asked if he did have enough money to hold an account with Coutts, whose website states clients are “required to maintain at least £1m in investments or borrowing [mortgage], or £3m in savings”, Mr Farage said: “I have been a customer of the group for 43 years, I have been a customer of Coutts since 2014. At no point did anybody say you have to have this amount of money.
“These things are all discretionary [and] they were using this, frankly, as a mask to cover up the truth.
“This is not about money in the account, this is about the fact they don’t like me.”
Asked if he thought Ms Rose should resign, Mr Farage added: “I think rather than just saying right now [Ms Rose] ought to go, I think now what needs to happen is the Treasury Select Committee needs to reconvene, come out of recess, and lets give her the opportunity to tell us the truth.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:31
Farage: ‘I was shocked with the vitriol’
In her letter, Ms Rose said she “fully understands” both Mr Farage’s and the public’s concerns that the processes for bank account closures were not “sufficiently transparent”, adding: “Customers have a right to expect their bank to make consistent decisions against publicly available criteria and those decisions should be communicated clearly and openly with them, within the constraints imposed by the law.”
She agreed that “sector-wide change” was needed but, following the incident with Mr Farage and Coutts, she would now commission a full review of the bank’s processes “to ensure we provide better, clearer and more consistent experience for customers in the future”.
In a further statement released after Sky News broke the story of the letter, Ms Rose reiterated her apology, but added: “It is not our policy to exit a customer on the basis of legally held political and personal views.
“Decisions to close an account are not taken lightly and involve a number of factors including commercial viability, reputational considerations, and legal and regulatory requirements.”
Banking giant JPMorgan Chase’s decision to cut ties with the CEO of Bitcoin payments company Strike is reigniting concerns about a renewed wave of US “debanking,” an issue that haunted the crypto industry during the 2023 banking turmoil.
Jack Mallers, CEO of the Bitcoin (BTC) Lightning Network payments company Strike, said Sunday on X that JPMorgan closed his personal accounts without explanation.
“Last month, J.P. Morgan Chase threw me out of the bank,” Mallers wrote. “Every time I asked them why, they said the same thing: We aren’t allowed to tell you.”
Cointelegraph has contacted JPMorgan Chase for comment.
“Operation Chokepoint 2.0 regrettably lives on,” said US Senator Cynthia Lummis in a Monday X post. Actions like JP Morgan’s “undermine the confidence in traditional banking” while sending the digital asset industry overseas, she said, adding:
“It’s past time we put Operation Chokepoint 2.0 to rest to make America the digital asset capital of the world.”
Other crypto founders, including Caitlin Long of Custodia Bank, said the debanking efforts targeting crypto may persist until January 2026, pending the appointment of a new Federal Reserve governor.
“Trump won’t have the ability to appoint a new Fed governor until January. So, therefore, you can see the breadcrumbs leading up to a potentially big fight,” Long said during Cointelegraph’s Chainreaction daily X show on March 21.
Long’s Custodia Bank was repeatedly targeted by US debanking efforts, which cost the company months of work and “a couple of million dollars,” she said.
The collapse of crypto-friendly banks in early 2023 sparked the first allegations of Operation Chokepoint 2.0, during which at least 30 technology and cryptocurrency founders were reportedly denied access to banking services under the administration of former President Joe Biden.
In August 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order related to debanking, aiming to prevent banks from cutting off services to politically unfavorable industries, including the cryptocurrency sector.
Debanking concerns took another turn in January, when Lummis’s office was contacted by an anonymous whistleblower, alleging that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was “destroying material” related to Operation Chokepoint 2.0.
“The FDIC’s alleged efforts to destroy and conceal materials from the U.S. Senate related to Operation Chokepoint 2.0 is not only unacceptable, it is illegal,” said Lummis in a letter published on Jan. 16, threatening “swift criminal referrals” if the wrongdoing was uncovered.
Senator Lummis’s open letter to FDIC Chair Marty Gruenberg. Source: Lummis.senate.gov
Traditional financial institutions have long criticized crypto firms for enabling illicit finance. But US banks have themselves paid more than $200 billion in fines over the past two decades for compliance failures, according to data compiled by Better Markets and the Financial Times.
Fines and penalties paid by the six leading US banks over the past 20 years. Source: Better Markets/FT
Bank of America reportedly accounted for about $82.9 billion of those penalties, while JPMorgan Chase paid more than $40 billion.
A new financial law in the United Arab Emirates is set to bring decentralized finance (DeFi) and broader Web3 into regulatory parameters, signaling an important shift for the industry.
The UAE’s new central bank law, Federal Decree Law No. 6 of 2025, introduces “one of the most consequential regulatory shifts” for the crypto industry in the region, Irina Heaver, a local crypto lawyer and founder of NeosLegal, told Cointelegraph.
“It brings protocols, DeFi platforms, middleware, and even infrastructure providers into scope if they enable activities such as payments, exchange, lending, custody, or investment services,” Heaver said.
According to the lawyer, industry projects building or operating in the UAE should treat this as a pivotal regulatory milestone and align their systems before the September 2026 transition deadline.
“We’re just code” is no longer a defence
Issued in the Official Gazette and legally effective since Sept. 16, 2025, the UAE’s Federal Decree Law No. 6 is a central bank law that regulates financial institutions, insurance business as well as digital asset-related activities.
Its key provisions, Article 61 and Article 62, provide a list of activities that require a license from the Central Bank of the UAE (CBUAE), including crypto payments and digital stored value.
“Article 62 states that any person who carries on, offers, issues, or facilitates a licensed financial activity ‘through any means, medium, or technology’ falls under the regulatory perimeter of the CBUAE,” Heaver said.
An excerpt from the UAE’s Federal Decree Law No. 6. Source: CBUAE
In practice, this means DeFi projects can no longer avoid regulation by claiming they are “just code,” the lawyer said, adding that the argument of “decentralization” does not exempt a protocol from compliance.
Protocols that support stablecoins, real-world assets (RWA), decentralized exchange (DEX) functions, bridges, or liquidity routing “may require a license,” Heaver said. The enforcement is already active, she added, with penalties for unlicensed activity including fines of up to 1 billion dirhams ($272.3 million) and potential criminal sanctions.
The law does not ban self-custody
As the UAE’s new central bank law is directly related to providing “stored value services,” the legislation is likely to affect cryptocurrency wallet providers, Kokila Alagh, founder and managing partner of Karm Legal Consultants, told Cointelegraph.
According to Alagh, there has been a “fair bit of confusion” around whether the law affects self-custody, or non-custodial wallets, which are designed to enable users to store their assets independently from any third party.
Although some industry observers like Trading Strategy’s Mikko Ohtamaa have suggested that the law translates to the “de facto ban” of crypto and self-custodial wallet apps in the UAE, Alagh and Heaver said that’s not the case.
An excerpt from the UAE’s Federal Decree Law No. 6. Source: CBUAE
“The law does not ban self-custody, nor does it restrict individuals from using their own wallets,” Alagh said, adding that it “simply expands” the regulatory perimeter for companies.
“If a wallet provider enables payments, transfers, or other regulated financial services for UAE users, licensing requirements may apply,” she noted.
Alagh mentioned that Karm Legal has received a significant number of queries regarding the issue, adding:
“Further clarification from the Central Bank is expected as the law moves through implementation, but for now, individuals remain unaffected while companies should assess whether their activities fall within regulated scope.”
Ironically, Ohtamaa’s post specifically criticized UAE lawyers, arguing that their business is “free of interest in the UAE.”
“For independent law firms, anything that makes the UAE less attractive for crypto is a loss of income, and these lawyers are happy to obfuscate facts and legal texts just to secure their yearly bonuses,” Ohtamaa argued.
Karm Legal’s Alagh told Cointelegraph that the firm is actively following up with CBUAE regarding the issue, but there is no set date for the authority to provide a clarification.
The SEC has just issued its second “no-action letter” toward a decentralized physical infrastructure network (DePIN) crypto project in recent months, giving its native token “regulatory cover” from enforcement.
The no-action letter was sent to the Solana DePIN project Fuse, which issues a network token, FUSE, as a reward to those actively maintaining the network.
Fuse initially submitted a letter to the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance on Nov. 19, asking for official confirmation that it would not recommend the SEC take enforcement action if the project continues to offer and sell FUSE tokens.
Fuse also outlined in its letter that FUSE is designed for network utility and consumptive purposes, not for speculation. They can only be redeemed for an average market price via third parties.
“Based on the facts presented, the Division will not recommend enforcement action to the Commission if, in reliance on your opinion as counsel, Fuse offers and sells the Tokens in the manner and under the circumstances described in your letter,” the Division of Corporation Finance’s deputy chief counsel, Jonathan Ingram, wrote on Monday.
SEC’s no-action letter to Fuse Crypto. Source: SEC
The latest SEC no-action letter comes just a few months after the SEC issued a similar “highly coveted” letter to Double Zero, which was seen as a result of a new, more crypto-friendly leadership at the SEC.
At the time, DoubleZero co-founder Austin Federa said such letters are common in TradFi but are “very rare” in the crypto space.
“It was a months long process, but we found the SEC to be quite receptive, we found them to be quite professional, quite diligent, there was no crypto animosity.”
The SEC was put under new leadership in April, after Paul Atkins was sworn in as the 34th chairman, and the agency has since been seen taking a more balanced approach to crypto. As part of the leadership, crypto-friendly Hester Peirce also heads up the agency’s crypto task force.
SEC no-action letters are a form of regulatory clarity
Adding to the discussion on X, Rebecca Rettig, a legal representative of Solana MEV infrastructure platform Jito Labs, said that no-action letters are sought after by many crypto projects.
“Why do crypto teams want them? ‘Regulatory clarity.’ If you’re planning to issue a token, a NAL provides reasonable assurance you won’t face immediate enforcement for violations of securities laws. It’s a kind of ‘regulatory cover,’” she wrote.
SEC giving a pass to Fuse wasn’t unexpected: Crypto lawyer
The no-action letter doesn’t necessarily set any new precedents, however.
Commenting on the subject via X on Monday, Consensys lawyer Bill Hughes said this was “an easy case,” given the nature of Fuse’s token.
“The take away is that there is not a lawyer in crypto that would have thought this token was a security. And maybe not even any lawyer who is merely familiar with Howey,” Hughes said.
The same month that Double Zero secured its no-action letter, the SEC also issued a similar no-action letter for crypto-custodians that don’t qualify as banks.
While they still have to meet strict conditions, the no-action letter provides clear guidelines for acceptable ways for these types of firms to operate and deal with crypto, something which the industry has been begging for over the past few years.