The sky is reflected differently by the towers in Toronto’s financial district than by those in New York. Even during busy business hours, the streets are quieter and the glass seems colder in some way. Although bankers always carry the same leather briefcases when they move between buildings, the tone of some of their conversations has changed recently. It’s possible that Canada, which has historically been viewed as Wall Street’s secondary financial hub, is beginning to feel more like something else entirely, a location where some financial services might feel safer.
Following years of domestic regulatory turbulence, U.S. Bancorp, one of the biggest banks in America, has been modifying its digital asset custody approach. After Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121 was revoked earlier in 2025, the company’s crypto custody services, which had been suspended due to stringent SEC accounting regulations implemented in 2022, have resumed. However, the recollection of those limitations endures, prompting silent concerns about whether American institutions may be looking more broadly when regulatory landscapes change in an unpredictable way.
Key Information Table
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Institution | U.S. Bancorp |
| Headquarters | Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA |
| Service Type | Bitcoin and Digital Asset Custody |
| Regulatory Issue | SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121 (rescinded 2025) |
| Crypto Partner | NYDIG (Sub-custodian) |
| Canadian Presence | Over $113 billion in assets across U.S. banks |
| Recent Role | Custodian for stablecoin reserves (Anchorage Digital) |
| Regulatory Reference |
Despite being the foundation of institutional cryptocurrency investing, custody services themselves hardly ever garner public attention. On behalf of investment managers, these systems safely store digital assets, safeguarding billions of dollars’ worth of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. With biometric scanners and silent server racks in place of teller counters, the atmosphere of the secure data facilities where custody operations are conducted feels less like traditional banking and more like a fusion of technology and finance.
There is a perception that bank executives have been permanently impacted by regulatory pressure in the US. Institutions like U.S. Bancorp were forced to completely halt services because of the previous SEC guidance that made crypto custody capital-intensive. Although those limitations have since been removed, confidence takes time to fully recover after being shaken.
Canada, on the other hand, is known for its measured regulatory clarity, providing guidelines that are simpler for investors and banks to understand. Before many other jurisdictions, Canadian financial authorities permitted digital asset services and cryptocurrency exchange-traded funds. Investors appear to think that predictability is more important to financial institutions than permissiveness.
Custody services have gradually resumed inside U.S. Bancorp’s operations, managing institutional clients’ Bitcoin holdings in collaboration with partners like NYDIG. As confidence in the bank’s technical prowess grows, it has also assumed responsibility for maintaining stablecoin reserves linked to Anchorage Digital Bank. However, the experience of having to halt services altogether might have permanently changed its approach to strategy.
It’s easy to understand why American companies continue to operate in Toronto when you stroll down Bay Street, which is home to Canada’s biggest banks. Compared to the historic towers on Wall Street, the buildings feel more contemporary but less imposing. In certain U.S. institutions, staff members discuss cryptocurrency in an open and still hesitant manner.
Although the possibility of American banks moving more custody operations north is still uncertain, it no longer seems as remote as it once did. Unlike factories, financial services can relocate quietly by using legal structures instead of moving their operations.
Regulation has always influenced the larger crypto industry just as much as technology. Just as capital flows toward opportunity, companies migrate toward jurisdictions that offer stability. As this develops, it seems that, despite a financial system based on global digital assets, geography still has a significant impact.
Although the episode demonstrated how quickly that confidence can shift, U.S. Bancorp’s decision to resume custody services suggests a renewed sense of confidence in the domestic regulatory environment. Being cautious by nature, banks tend to remember disruptions long after they have occurred.
Canada may be more appealing for having clearer regulations than for having fewer. This subtle but significant distinction affects decisions that are made in private boardrooms away from the general public.
As of right now, the custody infrastructure that underpins cryptocurrencies is still dispersed throughout several nations and is influenced more by legal frameworks than by technological advancements. The trust that underpins digital wealth is still bound to human institutions, even though the servers that house it may be located anywhere.
It is difficult to overlook the close relationship between financial power and regulatory confidence when one is situated between the serene financial avenues of Toronto and the agitated streets of New York. Knowing where to stand could be just as important for banks navigating the uncertain future of cryptocurrency as knowing what to hold.
