Signature Bank Shut Down by US Regulators Sends a Message Against Encryption

Signature Bank Shut Down by US Regulators Sends a Message Against Encryption

On March 14, Barney Frank, a member of the Board of Directors of the Crypto Friendly Bank Signature Bank and a former US congressman, said that the sudden announcement of the takeover of Signature by the US regulators on Sunday night shocked the executives of the bank, Signature executives have explored “all ways” to improve the status quo, including finding more capital and evaluating the interests of potential acquirers. He said that by Sunday, the outflow of deposits had slowed, and executives believed that they had stabilized the situation. On the contrary, the senior management of Signature has been immediately dismissed and the bank closed on Sunday. Frank believed that part of the reason for this was that regulators wanted to send very strong anti-encryption messages, and said that “the reason why we became a typical representative was that there was no insolvency in the fundamentals”.

Member of the Board of Directors of Signature: the bank is not insolvent, is closed or is subject to anti-encryption position of the regulatory authority

Analysis based on this information:


The recent closure of Signature Bank by US regulators has created a stir in the banking industry. Ex-board member and former Congressman, Barney Frank has gone on record stating the sudden announcement of this takeover on March 14th shocked the bank’s executives. Signature Bank had tried everything in their power to remedy the situation, including finding more capital and evaluating potential acquirers. The bank believed the situation had been stabilized by Sunday, but the regulators took decisive action and shut down the bank immediately.

Barney Frank believes this is not just about the financial situation of the bank but also about regulators wanting to send a “very strong anti-encryption message.” Signature Bank has been known for being crypto-friendly, and regulators may see this as a threat. Therefore, they decided to make an example of Signature Bank and send a message to other banks. Frank clarifies that the bank was not insolvent using fundamental accounting principles, and he thinks that this could be the reason why they became an example.

The closure of Signature Bank and the motives behind the regulators’ decision highlights the ongoing tension between the government and the cryptocurrency industry. Governments and regulatory bodies worldwide have been trying to find ways to regulate cryptocurrency and blockchain circulation. On the other side, cryptocurrencies have been built on the foundation of decentralization and encryption, allowing users to maintain their privacy, which is seen as a controversial and uneasy concept to regulators.

In conclusion, the takeover and subsequent shutdown of Signature Bank by US regulators is a message to crypto-friendly banks and the industry at large, making it clear that regulators want more control on banks and their roles in circulating cryptocurrencies. However, the reasons behind the closure of Signature Bank involve more than just the financial situation of the bank, but also a clear indication of regulators’ motives to maintain control and authority in the banking industry.

This article and pictures are from the Internet and do not represent qiAiAi's position. If you infringe, please contact us to delete:https://www.qiaiai.com/ai/7499.html

It is strongly recommended that you study, review, analyze and verify the content independently, use the relevant data and content carefully, and bear all risks arising therefrom.