Financial Giants and Encryption Platforms Clash Again: Data Access Becomes the Focus

The competition between traditional finance and the cryptocurrency industry is heating up again, with the main players being two major U.S. industry giants—a large bank known as the "leader of investment banks" and the established cryptocurrency trading platform Gemini. Recently, Gemini co-founder Tyler Winklevoss publicly criticized the bank for refusing to provide data services to Gemini, accusing it of trying to stifle fintech companies and crypto platforms through unfair competition. This incident has reminded industry insiders of the previous impact of the "Operation ChokePoint 2.0" campaign on crypto companies.

Data Access Rights Spark Controversy

As an intersection between traditional finance and the cryptocurrency industry, user data has always been at the core of both businesses. Complete KYC information can not only better assess users' risk preferences and asset sizes but also enable the platform to formulate more accurate security strategies and business plans.

The focus of this dispute is the access rights to banking data. Just as other tech giants consider platform data as important assets, the "data business" has become a crucial part of the platform economy. Tyler Winklevoss previously criticized a major bank for depriving Gemini of its right to access banking data for free through third-party platforms, instead charging high fees to fintech companies. In response, the bank immediately announced the suspension of its plans to re-accept Gemini as a client.

This action is seen as a unilateral suppression of encryption platforms by traditional financial giants, evoking memories of the previous "Operation ChokePoint 2.0" where banks refused to provide services to certain cryptocurrency companies.

Review of "Operation ChokePoint 2.0"

In 2023, several encryption-friendly banks went bankrupt one after another. Industry insiders believe that this may be the result of government pressure on banks to sever business ties with cryptocurrency companies. Subsequently, "Operation Chokepoint 2.0" gradually came to light.

According to a well-known venture capital founder, over the past four years, the bank accounts of more than 30 tech company founders have been closed. This kind of "denial of service" behavior often lacks a clear reason but has serious consequences, ranging from an inability to open bank accounts to restrictions on fund transfers, and even jeopardizing the survival of the companies.

It is worth noting that this action also affects the political landscape in the United States. Industry insiders have stated that it was precisely because of this improper regulatory process that they ultimately chose to support Trump. In March of this year, Trump promised to end "Operation Chokepoint 2.0"'s impact on the encryption industry at the White House encryption summit.

The Bank's New Strategy: Data Charges

Another focal point of this dispute is the Consumer Financial Protection Act. In 2024, the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued the final rule on Personal Financial Data Rights, requiring financial institutions to provide personal financial data free of charge upon consumer request. However, a certain large bank seems to have found a way to circumvent this regulation—charging platforms for user data.

At the same time, the banking industry is actively lobbying regulators. Recently, several banking and credit union industry organizations jointly requested a suspension of the review of bank license applications from encryption companies such as Circle and Ripple, citing that these applications lack transparency and may pose legal risks to the banking system.

Conclusion

Regardless of how the "user data" dispute between Gemini and a large bank ultimately ends, the competition between the banking industry and encryption platforms has become public. With the passage of relevant legislation, the competition between the two sides in cross-border payments, daily life, and commercial acceptance will enter a heated stage. In the future, whether traditional banks can continue to dominate the financial sector or whether encryption platforms will disrupt the existing pattern, the outcome of this dispute is worth our continued attention.