Bitget App
Trade smarter
Buy cryptoMarketsTradeFuturesStocksEarnInstitutionAI & More
Chokepoint 3.0? a16z Says Big Banks Are Quietly Strangling Crypto and Fintech Rivals

Chokepoint 3.0? a16z Says Big Banks Are Quietly Strangling Crypto and Fintech Rivals

CoinEditionCoinEdition2025/08/01 16:00
By:Abdulkarim Abdulwahab

Alex Rampell of a16z warns that major U.S. banks are engaging in “Operation Chokepoint 3.0.” He alleged a unilateral blocking of access to fintech and crypto platforms through high fees, data restrictions, and app blocking. He argues this new wave of anti-competitive behavior isn’t about profit, but about stifling competition.

  • Alex Rampell of a16z warns that major U.S. banks are engaging in “Operation Chokepoint 3.0.”
  • He alleged a unilateral blocking of access to fintech and crypto platforms through high fees, data restrictions, and app blocking.
  • He argues this new wave of anti-competitive behavior isn’t about profit, but about stifling competition.

Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) partner Alex Rampell is sounding the alarm on what he’s calling “Operation Chokepoint 3.0” for the crypto industry.

This is a new wave of anti-competition tactics allegedly being deployed by major U.S. banks to suppress the rise of fintech and crypto platforms. According to Rampell, while government-led pressure to de-bank crypto firms has eased under the new administration, traditional financial institutions are now taking matters into their own hands.

From Government Pressure to Private Sabotage

The original “ Operation Choke Point 2.0 ” under the Biden administration saw increased regulatory scrutiny that made it harder for crypto companies to get banking services. It made it harder for them to access banking services. Meanwhile, that era is over with the new administration under Donald Trump.

What comes next, Rampell warns, could be even more insidious. He argues that banks are now acting on their own to restrict competition through high fees, limited access to customer data, and in some cases, directly blocking apps.

“This isn’t about a new revenue stream,” Rampell writes. “It’s about strangling competition.”

Related: ConsenSys Survives Two Strikes from Operation Chokepoint, CEO Joe Lubin Shares Insights

Using High Fees to Price Out Competitors

Rampell points to major institutions like JPMorgan Chase as examples of banks charging exorbitant fees for even basic actions like transferring funds to crypto and fintech platforms, or accessing financial data through APIs. 

In some cases, users are effectively being charged for information as basic as their account number and routing code, data already printed on every check.

He warns that if it costs $10 to move $100 into a Coinbase or Robinhood account, many consumers will simply stay put. In effect, this limits their access to potentially better rates, investment options, or financial tools.

App Blocking and the End of Consumer Choice?

Even more concerning, Rampell says, is that some banks may be blocking consumers from linking certain fintech or crypto apps to their bank accounts entirely. If this behavior becomes widespread, consumers could lose access to many of the modern financial apps they rely on.

“Many banks have hostages, not customers,” Rampell says. He suggests that most people don’t have a realistic way to switch banks, especially when all major players follow the same practices.

Legal Solution Already Exists

Rampell calls on regulators, specifically the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), to enforce Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which guarantees consumers access to their own financial data.

“We don’t need a new law,” Rampell writes. “We just need the administration to prevent this callous and manipulative attempt to kill competition and consumer choice.”

Essentially, a16z’s warning highlights a brewing war between legacy finance and the next generation of financial infrastructure. It highlights the need for regulation that maintains a competitive financial ecosystem for crypto users.

0
0

Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.

Understand the market, then trade.
Bitget offers one-stop trading for cryptocurrencies, stocks, and gold.
Trade now!

You may also like

How much CPO demand will Nvidia Rubin Ultra generate? Bernstein: Optical value per Pod will increase fivefold

Bernstein believes that the co-packaged optics (CPO) and fiber demand driven by Nvidia's Rubin Ultra architecture will surge significantly, with the optical content per Pod rising from $1 million to $5.4 million. This will propel the size of Nvidia's optical ecosystem market to $46.8 billion by 2028 (a 91% annual increase). Although the industry faces supply bottlenecks with InP substrates, the outlook remains positive. The institution reiterates its “outperform” rating for Lumentum, Coherent, and Ciena.

华尔街见闻•2026/11/11 08:47
How much CPO demand will Nvidia Rubin Ultra generate? Bernstein: Optical value per Pod will increase fivefold

UBS Q3 implements a two-way strategy with gold options, heavily invests in technology stocks, and builds positions in SK Hynix (SKHY.US)

UBS Group (UBS.US) has submitted its Q3 holdings report (13F) as of September 30, 2026.

智通财经•2026/11/11 08:22
UBS Q3 implements a two-way strategy with gold options, heavily invests in technology stocks, and builds positions in SK Hynix (SKHY.US)

SpaceX (SPCX.US) reportedly attempts “de-Nvidiaization” at the rack level: developing Kessel cabinets to bypass L6 compute boards, purchasing only chips

SemiAnalysis: SpaceX has developed its own Kessel cabinet, bypassing Nvidia's L6 cards to provide more options for manufacturing its own hardware.

智通财经•2026/11/11 08:20
SpaceX (SPCX.US) reportedly attempts “de-Nvidiaization” at the rack level: developing Kessel cabinets to bypass L6 compute boards, purchasing only chips

$3.7 billion “data center power equipment prepayments” abandoned! What did "the most active buyer of gas turbines", SoftBank, see?

In the second quarter of fiscal year 2026, SoftBank reported a net loss of $7.1 billion, primarily due to a $3.7 billion impairment charge from a $9.5 billion advance payment for power generation equipment for US data centers—of which about $2.9 billion was non-refundable and effectively lost. The CFO admitted that SoftBank placed orders before the project plan was finalized, and is now conducting a comprehensive review of its procurement strategy. "The most aggressive purchaser of gas turbines has now written off the deposit in this way."

华尔街见闻•2026/11/11 08:19