Banks warned over denying sex workers business accounts | Financial Conduct Authority

https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/sep/04/city-regulator-fca-warns-banks-over-denying-sex-workers-business-accounts

Posted by Aggressive_Plates

11 Comments

  1. EwokSuperPig___ on

    Don’t warn them. Better regulate sex work so banks don’t need to worry about funding criminal behaviour just because the account is being produced by sex worker. Make it so sex work isn’t an industry rife with crime by protecting sex workers

  2. Whilst I get it… isn’t the concern that it’s being used to launder money for all these Onlyfans ‘managers’.

  3. This sounds familiar.

    Recently the Japanese government came down on VISA for refusing to process fees from Japanese adult sites along with demands on restricting content even though these sites violated no Japanese laws.

    They got hit for unfair bussiness practices and backed down.

    Considering how often these banks and financial services lie, cheat and steal i find it rather strange that they’re getting so uppity over stuff like porn or prostitutes.

  4. JimJonesdrinkkoolaid on

    I find it strange that Banks give a shit about this. You have to remember that some of these banks were involved in laundering money for drug cartels.

  5. Pretty-Tension-4189 on

    So when Farage is debanked it was a commercial decision, and now prostitutes are debanked it has become the moral issue he said it was. You all are agreeing with what makes sense now it involves people you don’t despise.

  6. Sex workers not having individual accounts kinda screws them if they’re combining this with other work and account get shut for rent payment or buy food etc. if they carry cash in hand more likely to be robbed and be unable to report it. That need safety and regulation esp if this is to help them find other opportunities outside sex work than be forced more into it

  7. Its not just sex workers, seems to be anything related to sex. I tried setting up a payment system for a sex shop and there website. Not one UK bank would allow it.

  8. not_who_you_think_99 on

    It’s not about being prudish. It’s about avoiding responsibility in the facilitation of money laundering.

    A plumber can take cash payments. But can also provide invoices and a calendar of appointments. Can prove he received £200 for servicing Mr White’s boiler.

    A sex worker won’t provide invoices to show she received £200 for servicing Mr White.

    So how can a bank know that’s what the money was for?
    What if the lady in question isn’t a sex worker but a drug dealer, and those payments are for drugs?

    That’s the problem.

  9. I reckon there should be a law of Payment Processor Neutrality in place.

    VISA and Mastercard shouldn’t be choosing to selectively not process payments based on moral objections. Can you imagine if they just decided that they didn’t like money being sent to LGBT charities because eww gay icky?

    If there’s risk of illegal activity, then the courts can make the decision to stop those payments. Otherwise, VISA does not get to decide what they do and don’t block, but neither are they held liable for any payment they process. They are the pipe, not the stuff going through it.

  10. Remarkable-Ad155 on

    Feels like banks can’t win in a way. If they do start letting these be used for frequent no questions asked cash deposits they’ll get kicked when people inevitably start exploiting the account holders to launder the proceeds of all kinds of much more harmful criminal activities. 

    Why is it the FCA’s job? If sex workers are suffering because they can’t get a bank account then it’s the law (and societal attitudes) that need to change. 

  11. I used to be involved in producing adult content. After I lost my job during covid I took up creating 18+ illustrated art and I got very popular very fast. I was getting slammed with commissions and with a pretty active Patreon, I ended up earning more in a month than I ever did working at Waterstones—but it was never safe.

    People keep saying that banks are refusing accounts to or refusing to facilitate transactions not being down to puritanical reasons—it is. I know this first hand because it’s an open secret in the R34/adult art community that you absolutely do not, ever, ever mention anything relative to the nature of the content you’re creating in direct bank transfers or PayPal invoices, because the transaction can and will be blocked and your accounts can and will be closed. PayPal especially is particularly egregious for it. You can have your entire livelihood torpedoed whilst you’re sound asleep in bed, and you won’t even find out until you wake up and see the suspension of services email.

    I know artists, big names in that sphere, who have spontaneously had their PayPal accounts suspended without warning, all because a commissioner put “payment for furry vore art” or something in the transaction note, and they’ve lost thousands over it. The American institutions are notorious for this kind of puritanical business operation, but this isn’t a new thing either. Even as we claim to be becoming more liberated and free thinking as a society, attitudes towards sex and adult content seem to be becoming increasingly regressive, especially in the digital space. Tumblr, Gumroad, Patreon, Onlyfans, all services built off the backs of the hardwork of their adult users, only for these sites turn around around and begin slowly strangling them off the service once they got big enough or are preparing to go public, all in the name of sanitising their image for future investors. Reddit will absolutely be next somewhere down the line.