In June 2023, former Brexit Party leader and broadcaster Nigel Farage publicly revealed that his private banking relationship with elite lender Coutts & Co (owned by the NatWest Group and best known for being the late Queen’s bank) was being terminated. The affair quickly escalated into a major controversy over “debanking,” free speech, and the role of banks in monitoring customers’ values.
The initial closure
On 29 June 2023, Farage took to X (formerly Twitter) to announce:
“The establishment are trying to force me out of the UK by closing my bank accounts. I have been given no explanation or recourse as to why this is happening to me.”
International Banker reported that Coutts told Farage his account was being closed for “commercial reasons.” He was instead offered a retail current account through NatWest, losing the privileges of Coutts’ private banking service. According to Reuters, the bank said he no longer met its minimum wealth criteria of around £1 million in assets. Farage rejected that explanation, declaring, “If they can do it to me, they can do it to you, too.”
Internal documents and public uproar
In July 2023, Farage obtained a 40-page internal dossier from Coutts through a subject-access request. The document, later published in part by International Banker, showed that Coutts’ “Wealth Reputational Risk Committee” viewed him as posing reputational risk. One passage read:
“At best he is seen as xenophobic and pandering to racists… the client’s views are at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation.”
The disclosure caused a political storm. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) confirmed it was investigating NatWest/Coutts’ handling of the case, noting that banks cannot discriminate based on political views. Treasury Minister Andrew Griffith said banks have a “duty not to ‘debank’ because you disagree with someone’s views,” while Prime Minister Rishi Sunak added: “No one should be barred from using basic services for their political views.” (UnHerd)
Resignations and review
On 25 July 2023, NatWest Group CEO Dame Alison Rose resigned after admitting she had spoken to a BBC journalist about Farage’s account closure before the bank made an official statement. (Associated Press) An independent review by Travers Smith LLP later concluded that the decision to close the account was “lawful and commercially justified,” but found “serious failings” in how the matter was communicated and in handling confidential information. Farage dismissed the review, saying:
“This is laughable… The idea that my political views weren’t a factor is absurd.”
Broader impact and proposed reforms
The debanking affair triggered national debate about banking access and freedom of expression. UnHerd observed that banks “are currently free to terminate customers without explanation — and Farage is not an isolated case.” In March 2024, the UK government proposed new laws requiring banks to give customers at least 90 days’ notice and clear reasons before account closures — a direct response to the Farage case. (Reuters)
Farage wrote that “without a bank account, you effectively become a non-person,” and described the experience as “serious political persecution at the very highest level.” (International Banker)
Settlement and aftermath
By March 2025, the dispute was formally resolved. NatWest Group issued a public apology and settled with Farage, who confirmed that “an agreement has been reached.” (The Guardian) NatWest’s chairman, Sir Howard Davies, admitted that the bank’s treatment of Farage “fell short of the standards that any customer should expect.” (Associated Press)
Why it matters
The Farage–Coutts affair matters on several fronts. It exposed how banks assess “reputational risk,” sometimes extending into judgments about political beliefs. It forced regulators and ministers to confront questions about fairness and free expression in financial services. And it led directly to proposed reforms giving customers more rights and transparency around account closures.
As Farage himself warned: “If they can do it to me, they can do it to you, too.”
Beyond the individual dispute, the case has become a symbol of broader anxieties about corporate power and personal freedoms in modern Britain. With the settlement complete, its legacy may lie not in Farage’s finances but in the future shape of banking regulation and the right to financial inclusion.
Key sources: Associated Press, The Guardian, Reuters, International Banker, and UnHerd.
