A bank will generally ask you to list the wallets and exchange accounts involved, prove that you control them, and document how you acquired the crypto and how its value grew, with a transaction trail linking the original source to the transfer arriving at the bank. It then screens that on-chain history for links to sanctions, fraud, mixers or other high-risk sources. Requirements differ between banks and depend on the amount and your profile, and the final decision always rests with the bank.
The rules behind it
Banks everywhere apply national anti-money laundering laws built on the FATF Recommendations. They must identify the client and the beneficial owner, understand the purpose of the relationship and keep monitoring it (Recommendation 10). When a transaction appears unusual or the risk is higher, they apply enhanced due diligence, which includes checking the source of funds and, for many private clients, the source of wealth. Recommendations 15 and 16 bring virtual assets and transfers between crypto service providers under the same framework, and every inflow is screened against sanctions lists.
Most banks classify significant inflows from crypto as requiring additional clarification under their internal policy, regardless of the client's honesty. The question is not whether crypto is allowed, but whether the bank can document that these specific funds are legitimate.
What banks typically ask for
- Identity documents and a declaration of the beneficial owner.
- The list of wallet addresses and exchange accounts involved.
- Proof of control of self-hosted wallets, for example a signed message or a small test transaction.
- Complete exchange statements: deposits, trades and withdrawals, not only the final sale.
- Evidence of the original source: bank transfers used to buy, mining records, contracts or invoices for crypto received.
- Tax returns showing that the holdings were declared, where applicable.
- A written explanation of the purpose of the transfer and, for larger or complex cases, an independent on-chain report.
How the bank assesses the file
Compliance checks plausibility (does the amount fit your profession, age and known wealth?), consistency (do dates and amounts match across documents?) and on-chain exposure (did the funds pass through services linked to sanctions, mixers, scams or hacks, directly or a few steps away?). Funds arriving from a regulated exchange in your name are usually easier to accept than funds from an unknown counterparty.
When crypto is sent directly to a bank or another regulated provider, the Travel Rule (FATF Recommendation 16) requires information on the sender and the recipient to accompany transfers between providers. A transfer from a self-hosted wallet has no provider on the other side, so institutions usually accept it only from wallets that belong to their own client, after verifying ownership with suitable means such as a signed message or a test transaction. EU Regulation 2023/1113, for example, requires providers to assess whether a self-hosted address is owned or controlled by their customer above a set amount.
Differences between banks
Some banks decline crypto-derived funds entirely, others accept them only from selected exchanges, and banks specialised in digital assets have dedicated procedures. Practice also varies between countries, because each national law and supervisor sets its own detail on documentation. Asking the bank about its requirements before you transfer saves time.
How Advisorn helps
Advisorn prepares a signed report built around what the bank asks for, with verifiable annexes and on-chain data, and handles the bank's follow-up questions.
FATF Recommendations 10, 15 and 16; FATF Updated Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach to Virtual Assets and Virtual Asset Service Providers (2021); Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 on transfers of funds and crypto-assets (EU example)
Updated November 2026 · General information, not legal or tax advice on your specific case.