The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has imposed a $750 million civil money penalty on Bank of America, N.A., for failures in its anti-money-laundering program. The agency calls it the largest civil money penalty in its history. The money is payable to the U.S. Treasury, and the agency’s announcement describes no refund or restitution for the bank’s customers.
That answers a question many account holders ask when a big bank is fined: whether any of it comes back to them. For this penalty, it does not. The case is about how the bank watched for suspicious transactions, not about fees or charges taken from ordinary accounts.
Why does the money go to Treasury and not to customers?
A civil money penalty is a payment from the bank to the government for breaking the rules. It is not a settlement of customer harm. The OCC states that this $750 million is payable to the U.S. Treasury, and its release describes no restitution component.
Anyone holding an account at the bank should not expect a check, a credit or a letter tied to this penalty. No claim form exists because no pool of refunds was created. Balances, fees and deposit protections on an ordinary checking or savings account are unchanged by the announcement.
What changed this year: Social Security and Medicare change every year, and nobody sends you a memo. The Retirement Money Brief breaks down what changed and what to do.
Get the Retirement Money Brief →
We may earn a commission from links on this page.
What did the OCC find at Bank of America?
In News Release 2026-89, dated October 13, 2026, the OCC says the bank violated the Bank Secrecy Act and its implementing regulations, including 12 CFR 21.21 and 12 CFR 21.11. The agency found the bank’s program for guarding against money laundering deficient and ineffective.
The findings are specific. A deficient transaction monitoring system meant the bank did not properly monitor trillions of dollars in transactions. The bank also filed many late suspicious activity reports covering billions of dollars, and many of those carried indicators of money laundering.
The OCC says the bank knew for years that it was not escalating potentially suspicious activity to investigators and did not fix the problem. Its Bank Secrecy Act officer and staff lacked sufficient skills and expertise, and key personnel were not properly trained to identify, investigate and report suspicious activity, which led to inaccurate and late reports. The bank’s audit function also missed long-standing concerns that examiners later found.
Is the $1.2 billion FinCEN fine on top of the OCC penalty?
No. The OCC says it coordinated the action with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, known as FinCEN. FinCEN is assessing a $1.2 billion fine and requiring the bank to take remedial action, and that fine credits the OCC’s $750 million penalty.
The two figures therefore do not add together. The $750 million is counted inside the $1.2 billion, so the combined financial penalty is the larger FinCEN number, not $1.95 billion.
What did the bank agree to before, and what happens next?
This is not the bank’s first run-in on the subject. In December 2024, Bank of America agreed to a cease-and-desist order requiring it to fix deficiencies in its anti-money-laundering compliance program. The OCC says the bank did not complete many of the required steps afterward, and that more than a year after the order it still was not escalating potentially suspicious activity.
The agency also says the bank processed potential trade-based money laundering transactions because of a systemic gap in its transaction monitoring. It concluded that bank management failed to ensure an effective program and allowed significant deficiencies to continue.
Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan V. Gould put it plainly in the announcement: “The bank’s poor response to its BSA deficiencies is unacceptable.” He added that the OCC expects all banks to have an effective program and that those without one “can expect swift and significant action from the OCC.”
Does a bank penalty change what protects a deposit?
The penalty does not touch how deposits are held, and it does not create new rights for account holders. What protects a Social Security deposit from a creditor’s reach is a separate set of rules, and those apply no matter which bank holds the money. The OCC’s release is the place to confirm what the agency ordered and what it left out.
Wondering what protects a Social Security deposit at a big bank?
A fine like this one pays nothing to account holders, and the headlines rarely say what does shield the money sitting in an account. Missing the rule that guards benefit deposits, or not knowing what to do when a balance is suddenly frozen, can leave a retiree scrambling at the worst moment.
The Bank Account & Debt Protection Kit lays out the 2-month bank protection rule and the frozen-account response, and it walks through the steps to make a collector prove a debt. Part 2, “Money They Cannot Touch,” covers what collectors can and cannot take from an account that holds Social Security.
Get the frozen-account response and bank protection rule guide →
More Financial Reading
- 21 Ways to Stretch a $2,087 Social Security Check
- 15 Places to Find Your Share of the $4.25 Billion States Give Back
- 15 Ways Retirees Are Tapping a Record $14.9 Trillion in Home Equity
This article was produced with AI assistance and edited for accuracy against the sources linked above.
