The New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) said its decision to close Signature Bank had “nothing to do with crypto” but was triggered by “a significant crisis of confidence in the bank’s leadership” after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. This contradicts Signature Bank board member and former U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, who said that he was the closure of the bank as a very strong sign of the anti-crypto attitude of regulators. The bank would not have been illiquid, he said.
Signature Bank had total assets of about $110.36 billion and total deposits of roughly $88.59 billion as of Dec. 31. The bank’s crypto-related deposits soared from $40 billion in 2019 to $106 billion in 2021. It also had a major foothold in the New York City rental market, financing approximately 3,000 multifamily buildings home to about 80,000 tenants.
According to Reuters, NYDFS denied Frank’s claims in a statement on Tuesday, saying that its decision to close Signature Bank on Sunday and appoint the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp as receiver “was based on the current status of the bank and its ability to do business in a safe and sound manner on Monday.”
The decisions made over the weekend had nothing to do with crypto. Signature was a traditional commercial bank with a wide range of activities and customers.
an NYDFS spokesperson
The FDIC established a new entity, Signature Bridge Bank, to keep banking services operating for customers and enable depositors to access their funds. The U.S. Treasury Department and other bank regulators announced Sunday that all of the depositors at Signature Bank and Silicon Valley Bank would be made whole, and “the taxpayer will bear no losses.”
