(UNITED STATES) — The Trump administration is considering an executive order or regulatory action that would require banks to collect proof of citizenship from customers, according to reports from the Wall Street Journal, CNN and Semafor.
The reports described a proposal that could touch both new accounts and existing customers, raising questions about access to basic banking services for immigrants and others who may not have the requested documents.
Wall Street Journal, CNN and Semafor reported the administration is weighing whether banks should request documentation such as passports as part of the effort to collect citizenship data.
Any move that pushes banks beyond routine identity checks could force large-scale outreach to account holders and trigger disputes over privacy, compliance costs and what happens to people who cannot quickly produce documentation.
Details remained unsettled in the reports, including whether a requirement would stop at collecting information or go further and penalize customers who do not comply.
Another open question involves how banks would handle noncitizens who are lawfully present in the United States, the reports said.
The proposal, as described, would reportedly apply retroactively to current account holders, not just prospective customers, creating administrative challenges for financial institutions.
For consumers, the retroactive element could mean banks request citizenship proof from people who have held accounts for years, potentially on a timeline banks would set and enforce through changes to account access.
Uncertainty also extends to consequences for customers who cannot provide documents, with the reporting describing it as unclear whether the policy would merely require information collection or extend to closing accounts for those unable to provide documentation.
Any system that relies on document collection would also raise operational questions inside banks, including how they would verify and store sensitive identification records, and what they would accept from customers who do not have the documents at hand.
Lawful noncitizens could face a separate set of problems if the policy demands citizenship proof rather than a broader form of lawful-status documentation, because citizenship and lawful presence are not the same thing.
Chi Chi Wu, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center, questioned the administration’s authority to impose the requirement by executive order alone.
“Legal authority is questionable,” Wu said, adding that Trump likely lacks authority to enforce such requirements through executive order alone.
Wu said modifying existing laws would require congressional approval, and she pointed to the constraints of the Administrative Procedure Act for any regulatory shift of this scale.
Even if the administration pursues regulation rather than an executive order, the Administrative Procedure Act process could span one to two years, Wu said.
Privacy law could also limit how any policy works in practice, particularly if the effort aims to create new streams of customer data that banks collect and potentially share.
The Right to Financial Privacy Act establishes that “the government cannot simply request a bank to provide financial records” without valid justification such as a subpoena.
Banks could resist the requirement for business reasons as well as compliance burden, Wu said.
Wu anticipated financial institutions would oppose the requirement, as it could result in significant business losses from foreign nationals.
The reports also pointed to the risk of uneven application across institutions, as banks interpret and implement new compliance expectations in different ways, potentially producing inconsistent customer experiences.
A sweeping citizenship verification requirement would also collide with the realities of account maintenance, including how banks would handle customers who do not respond to outreach, who lack certain documents, or who face barriers obtaining them quickly.
Those uncertainties matter because large banks serve millions of customers, and even a small change in onboarding or account review practices can ripple widely across households and communities.
Banks already operate under “know your customer” rules that require them to verify identity, but that baseline does not require citizenship verification, the reports said.
Under existing regulations, banks must collect names, dates of birth and addresses as part of the standard identity process.
Citizenship verification would add a different and more specific question than routine identity checks, and it could require documentation that many customers do not routinely use in daily life.
Social Security Numbers often feature in account opening, but the presence of an SSN is not the same as proof of U.S. citizenship.
While some banks require a Social Security Number, major institutions including JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo do not, according to the reports.
That distinction could become more important if banks are asked to bridge a gap between current identity checks and a new mandate that focuses on citizenship as a condition for holding or opening an account.
In that scenario, banks would need to decide what documentation satisfies the requirement and how to treat customers whose status is lawful but who cannot produce citizenship proof because they are not citizens.
The reports did not settle whether the administration would pursue a uniform approach through an executive order, a regulator-led process, or some combination, and they described key elements as still under deliberation.
Public confirmation from the administration has not arrived, and the White House criticized the reporting.
White House spokesperson Kush Desai said: “Any reporting regarding potential policy changes that have not been officially confirmed by the White House is unfounded speculation.”
White House Considers Executive Order to Force Banks Collect Passport Data
Reports suggest the Trump administration may mandate that banks collect proof of citizenship from all customers. This retroactive proposal faces significant legal hurdles regarding executive authority and privacy rights. Experts warn that implementing such checks could take years and disrupt banking access for lawful noncitizens. Financial institutions anticipate high compliance costs and potential loss of international clients if these rigorous documentation requirements are enacted.
