Custodia Bank Loses Fed Master Account Battle – But the Fight Isn’t Over

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit voted 7-3 to deny Custodia Bank a rehearing, as reported by TheBlock, closing what had been a five-year fight to gain direct access to the U.S. payment system. The court upheld an earlier ruling from October 2025: the Fed doesn’t have to let every eligible bank in. It can say no, and it doesn’t have to explain much.

Custodia had applied for a so-called “master account” back in October 2020. These accounts, held at Federal Reserve Banks, give financial institutions direct access to the U.S. payment rails — the infrastructure behind wire transfers, interbank settlements, and the like. Without one, a bank must route transactions through a partner institution, adding cost, friction, and dependency.

The Kansas City Fed rejected Custodia’s application in January 2023, citing the bank’s heavy exposure to crypto assets. The court’s ruling this month confirms that rejection stands — and that the Fed had every right to make it.

A “Death Sentence” – and Three Judges Who Said So

Not everyone on the bench agreed. Judge Timothy Tymkovich, joined by two colleagues, issued a sharp dissent. His argument: denying a master account is, in practical terms, a death sentence for a bank. It doesn’t shut the doors officially, but it makes operation nearly impossible. Tymkovich warned that the majority’s ruling effectively hands unelected Fed officials a veto over which state-chartered banks get to function — a serious blow to the U.S. “dual banking” system, where states and the federal government share oversight of financial institutions.

The dissent is significant beyond this case. It raises constitutional questions about administrative overreach that could attract attention at the Supreme Court level.

The Kraken Twist

Here’s where the story gets complicated. Just nine days before the court buried Custodia’s case, the same Kansas City Fed that rejected Custodia granted Kraken Financial — another Wyoming-chartered, crypto-focused firm — a limited master account. The first ever issued to a crypto-native company.

The catch: Kraken’s account is “skinny.” It allows direct access to the Fedwire payment network, but strips out features like emergency lending access and interest on reserves. It’s also a one-year pilot, not a permanent arrangement.

Fed Governor Christopher Waller has been developing this “skinny account” framework as a middle path — letting specialized firms touch the payment system without absorbing the full risk profile of a traditional bank. The Fed has also quietly pulled back some of the stricter 2023 guidance that had previously made crypto banking applications nearly impossible to advance.

The result is a strange new reality: Custodia, which fought hardest and longest, got nothing. Kraken, which came later, got a version of what Custodia wanted — minus the full benefits.

Capitol Hill Is Watching

Senate Republicans, particularly those aligned with the so-called “Crypto Caucus,” are not staying quiet.

Senator Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming has been the loudest voice. She’s called the Fed’s years-long treatment of Custodia “Operation Chokepoint 2.0,” a reference to a controversial Obama-era regulatory program that pressured banks to cut ties with certain legal industries. Lummis claims her office has written documentation showing the Fed pushed financial institutions to drop crypto clients for political reasons — not financial ones.

Fed Vice Chair Michelle Bowman added fuel to that argument in a recent speech, admitting that the “Tier 3” account category Custodia had applied for was essentially never going to be approved — what she described as “unobtanium.” For critics, that’s an admission that the Fed strung Custodia along for years with no real intention of granting access.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott has zeroed in on the FIRM Act, legislation that would require banking decisions to be based on measurable financial risk, not “reputational risk” — a vague standard critics say has been used to exclude crypto companies for political rather than prudential reasons.

What Comes Next

Custodia CEO Caitlin Long is widely expected to petition the Supreme Court. The constitutional arguments in Judge Tymkovich’s dissent — particularly around the “Major Questions Doctrine,” which limits how much power unelected agencies can claim without explicit Congressional authorization — give that petition a plausible basis, even if the odds are long.

At the same time, industry observers expect Custodia may eventually abandon the full-account fight and reapply for a skinny account along the lines of what Kraken received. It would be a retreat, but a functional one.

In Congress, the GENIUS Act and the FIRM Act are being merged in the Senate. Together, they aim to force the Fed to process master account applications within 90 days and publish clear, objective criteria for approval or denial. The upcoming April 2026 Fed oversight hearings are expected to put Chairman Jerome Powell directly in the crossfire.

The broader picture: roughly 70% of crypto-native firms currently report difficulty maintaining a basic U.S. dollar banking relationship. Kraken is, for now, the only such firm with direct Fed access — and even that comes with an expiration date.

The Fed won this round in court. Whether it can hold that position in Congress, and potentially before the Supreme Court, is a different question.

The information provided in this article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Coindoo.com does not endorse or recommend any specific investment strategy or cryptocurrency. Always conduct your own research and consult with a licensed financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

The post Custodia Bank Loses Fed Master Account Battle – But the Fight Isn’t Over appeared first on Coindoo.