New York Regulator Slams SEC’s Claim Of Linking Crypto To Banking Collapse

The New York regulator disagreed with Gary Gensler's assertion that Signature Bank's collapse was caused by its exposure to cryptocurrencies.
By Pratik Bhuyan
Updated August 1, 2025
crypto link banking collapse

According to the New York state financial regulator, the failure of Signature Bank in March was not caused by the institution’s exposure to crypto clientele but rather by a run on the bank due to a diverse group of depositors from a variety of economic sectors. This comes after former U.S. Representative Barney Frank criticized the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) for taking preemptive action relating to the bank’s engagement with the crypto industry and the SEC Chair’s latest comment on tying the banking collapse with crypto at a congressional hearing yesterday.

Advertisement
Advertisement

NYDFS Debunks Crypto Exposure Theory

In the Financial Services Committee hearing on stablecoins on Wednesday, NYDFS superintendent Adrienne Harris claimed that not just cryptocurrency clients but also depositors such as wholesale food suppliers, fiduciaries, trust accounts, and legal firms withdrew funds, which ultimately resulted in the untimely bank run.

Read More: Solana Investor A16z Unveils New Optimism-Based Rollup Called Magi

While speaking about the benefits and different use cases of stablecoins at the ongoing Congressional hearing, Harris was quoted as saying:

It is a misnomer that the failure of Signature Bank was related to crypto. The outflow of crypto deposits were in exact proportion to the representation in the depositor base overall.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Adrienne Harris Clarifies Banking Collapse

Harris commented that approximately twenty percent of Signature’s deposits were taken out of the bank on the same evening that Silicon Valley Bank failed. However, those transactions were solely tied to cryptocurrency and the remaining customer withdrawals were from ordinary commercial businesses with uninsured deposits. As a result, Harris explicitly refuted the claim that the failure was due to crypto deposits and the volatility which came with it.

“So it’s of course unfortunate that there was a run on the bank, but it is not the case that the failure Signature was related to crypto”, the superintendent further added.

Also Read: Dogecoin Traders Await Back To Back Elon Musk News; DOGE To Soar?

Advertisement
Pratik Bhuyan
Pratik has been a crypto evangelist since 2016 & been through almost all that crypto has to offer. Be it the ICO boom, bear markets of 2018, Bitcoin halving to till now - he has seen it all.
Why trust CoinGape: CoinGape has covered the cryptocurrency industry since 2017, aiming to provide informative insights to our readers. Our journalists and analysts bring years of experience in market analysis and blockchain technology to ensure factual accuracy and balanced reporting. By following our Editorial Policy, our writers verify every source, fact-check each story, rely on reputable sources, and attribute quotes and media correctly. We also follow a rigorous Review Methodology when evaluating exchanges and tools. From emerging blockchain projects and coin launches to industry events and technical developments, we cover all facets of the digital asset space with unwavering commitment to timely, relevant information.
Investment disclaimer: The content reflects the author’s personal views and current market conditions. Please conduct your own research before investing in cryptocurrencies, as neither the author nor the publication is responsible for any financial losses.
Ad Disclosure: This site may feature sponsored content and affiliate links. All advertisements are clearly labeled, and ad partners have no influence over our editorial content.