Could You Be Debanked for Political Views? The Risk in Canada is Real Earlier this summer I had a rude awakening about our banking system here in Canada. I received a generic letter from the bank, saying the account I used to help people featured on this page would be shut down. It said the level of risk surrounding the account was outside of their risk parameters. No reasons were given as to how they had made that assessment. When I called the bank, I was also given no reasons. A decision had been made to cut me loose, and there was no getting around it. It was similar to other debanking letters I've seen circulating online. I was given a few months to find other options. Thankfully, I was able to find an alternative, but it scared me to learn that you can be debanked without reason and with no recourse. I've also had several other people approach me personally sharing how multi-decade relationships with a big bank were severed after mysterious circumstances, one in particular where the lady made a fair, but politically incorrect comment to the bank when frustrated. I've thought about this very seriously since receiving this letter, and have done some research surrounding the issue. The basic solution is to create a bank that refuses to debank people for political reasons. This is actually quite possible, provided there's enough people that want it. I have created an important survey in the comments below asking your thoughts on this idea. Please fill out this survey today. I've learned through my research that access to the banking system in Canada is not guaranteed, and you could be debanked for your political or other views without even knowing it. We saw an extreme example during the invocation of the Emergency Act, where various accounts were frozen, but it seems to be happening more regularly. Given advanced social credit systems in countries like communist China, any move in the direction to control access to our finances must be fiercely opposed. Access to banking is essential in our modern society. Paying or receiving a mortgage or line of credit, cashing cheques, sending e-transfers, paying bills, shopping in person and online, investing for retirement, receiving access to business credit and business banking services, and much more requires a bank. Without access, we'd have to deal entirely in cash, and self-protect all our wealth by burying it or storing it on our property. Access to investments and other ways to grow wealth would be very limited. Outside of limited exceptions, there is no positive right to access the Banking System in Canada. Banks can and do sever relationships with clients under the guise of "derisking" without any true recourse on behalf of the customer. I've seen several examples of this recently. For example, a prominent lawyer from the Emergency Act Inquiry (who grilled Trudeau himself) posted a letter online from a Big 5 bank showing they were terminating their relationship. The letter gave no reason other than saying the level of risk surrounding the accounts was outside of their risk parameters. There is a limited statutory right to have a basic personal account opened at a federally regulated bank, if you show up in person with proper ID. This is the limited exception noted above. Credit unions and many other institutions are not covered by this rule, and can refuse anyone for any reason (I have other stories dealing with credit unions, but will share them another time). Once the account is open, courts have confirmed that a bank can end the relationship, and the customer cannot force the account back open. The OBSI (Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments) states that banks are not required to explain why they close an account, and OBSI will not compensate if notice was given. You can complain through the OBSI, but they rarely force reinstatement. In practice, banks can and do shut down accounts without reason, and there's not much you can do. Another overt political example of debanking happened in the UK. Nigel Farage, a prominent politician in favour of Brexit, was debunked by a bank he'd been with for decades. He said 7 other banks refused him after this. He obtained an internal dossier where staff had written that his politics were "at odds with our position as an inclusive organization", and treated his profile as a reputational risk. When this came out, 2 key executives at this bank left or resigned. The bank settled with Farage, apologized, and paid an undisclosed sum. In Canada, it's not clear there would be any way to know if you were debanked for political reasons, nor would there be recourse. A March Financial Post article notes that the US and UK have taken serious measures to prevent de-banking and Canada should do likewise. It says: "The federal government has done nothing to stop the weaponization of the banking sector, while our banks have offered no assurances to Canadians concerned they might lose their accounts because of their political views or affiliations. Only one financial institution, Alberta-based Bow Valley Credit Union, has publicly committed not to de-bank its law-abiding customers." "The fact that Ottawa is not following our allies on this topic is not surprising, given that it was the Liberal government of Justin Trudeau that unconstitutionally coerced our banks to de-bank selected customers by means of the Emergencies Act...[in addition] Financial institutions, including banks, have maintained exclusions for the oil and gas sector for ideological, not fiscal or business, reasons." "Banks hold a government charter to conduct banking. That charter grants a privilege, but it also comes with the responsibility to stay focused on the purpose of banking. Withholding services based on the ideological alignment or political perspective of clients is overreach. As both customers and shareholders of the banks, Canadians need to hold them to account for any activity that strays from the business of banking." (emphasis added.) Banking should be open to all, and there should be no moral or political test to access the system. If a "freedom bank" existed that would never debank you for political or moral views, would fight tooth and nail in court against any government attempts to do so, and gave of its profits to its customers and the country, including key areas of concern like homelessness and addiction etc., would you be interested?