The decision to close Signature Bank is not related to the bank’s activities aimed at cooperation with cryptocurrency companies. This is reported The Block with reference to a representative of the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
Earlier, former member of the board of directors of Signature Bank Barney Frank said that the authorities deliberately took such harsh measures to scare financial institutions away from working with digital assets. According to him, the company coped with all the problems even before the intervention of regulators.
The NYDFS noted that the bank’s business went beyond digital assets.
“Signature was a traditional commercial bank with a wide range of activities and clients, including small businesses […]such as food suppliers, mortgage companies, real estate companies and so on, ”the representative of the department added.
According to information BloombergThe US Department of Justice is also investigating Signature Bank. Law enforcers believe that the organization allegedly did not take sufficient measures to counter money laundering.
According to agency sources, the US Securities and Exchange Commission is also interested in the bank’s activities.
March 10 California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation closed Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and appointed FDIC manager. The reason for this decision was “insufficient liquidity and insolvency.”
Recall that on March 13, the US authorities began the procedure for reorganizing SVB and Signature Bank.
The regulators said savers would gain access to their deposits at the expense of shareholders and some unsecured bond holders.
Found a mistake in the text? Select it and press CTRL+ENTER
Cryplogger Newsletters: Keep your finger on the pulse of the bitcoin industry!
The decision to close Signature Bank is not related to the bank’s activities aimed at cooperation with cryptocurrency companies. This is reported The Block with reference to a representative of the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
Earlier, former member of the board of directors of Signature Bank Barney Frank said that the authorities deliberately took such harsh measures to scare financial institutions away from working with digital assets. According to him, the company coped with all the problems even before the intervention of regulators.
The NYDFS noted that the bank’s business went beyond digital assets.
“Signature was a traditional commercial bank with a wide range of activities and clients, including small businesses […]such as food suppliers, mortgage companies, real estate companies and so on, ”the representative of the department added.
According to information BloombergThe US Department of Justice is also investigating Signature Bank. Law enforcers believe that the organization allegedly did not take sufficient measures to counter money laundering.
According to agency sources, the US Securities and Exchange Commission is also interested in the bank’s activities.
March 10 California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation closed Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and appointed FDIC manager. The reason for this decision was “insufficient liquidity and insolvency.”
Recall that on March 13, the US authorities began the procedure for reorganizing SVB and Signature Bank.
The regulators said savers would gain access to their deposits at the expense of shareholders and some unsecured bond holders.
Found a mistake in the text? Select it and press CTRL+ENTER
Cryplogger Newsletters: Keep your finger on the pulse of the bitcoin industry!
