Oh god that sounds so painful!!!

Thanks for the update and info about the questions asked to transfer the money across. Will keep that in mind for future allocations for BTC.

Yes @SudMav it's no wonder investors simply find it easier to use the ETF/s, although that does limit the ability to one day use BTC as a currency, if that's your thing.

I feel your pain @lowway -- it's outrageous.

The only path I found for large amounts is to buy the Monochrome ETF which allows for in-kind redemptions. But there's a lot of hassle -- you need to convert to issuer sponsored, you have to then apply and open some account with a US custodian and then you can finally take custody. It's a palava. It's probably easier just to buy the Monochrome ETF and at least know you have that option down the track.

My guess is that the banks will change their tune quickly once they have the regulatory clarity to custody on behalf of customers themselves. Never underestimate the ability of a banker to shift their moral compass when there's a buck to be made ;)

That change is very likely coming to the US in the next year. Both the House and Senate actually voted to overturn SAB 121 earlier this year, which prevented banks from holding BTC, but President Biden vetoed the resolution as part of the Dems anti-crypto stance (well intentioned and justified by all the grift and scam in that space, but not well informed). Anyway, Trump's already said he'll overturn it again. So it'll be normalised soon enough, imo.

Good to know @Strawman but it sure does sound like a lot of effort, when a reasonable person would expect to be able to spend their money as they are fit.

Funny how there is no ban by the banks on gambling transfers or large donations to political parties...... just saying!!

I wonder if they would be keen on reimbursing me any capital gains lost while waiting patiently for my cash to be released for investment. The other galling part is the way they say they are acting in my best interest to prevent a possible scam. They are such upstanding organisations with my best interests always front of mind (insert canned laughter here).

I like your optimism that it will get easier Andrew, but unfortunately I think it will still be a ways away.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/not-a-single-care-victims-of-hsbc-fraud-say-bank-could-have-stopped-the-scammers-20240716-p5ju22.html

This article outlined the difficulty the banks are facing with highly technical scammers who steal access to accounts, siphon funds to another bank account and then immediately deposit large amounts into Crypto exchanges and send it offshore in minutes. Then the customer turns around to the bank and understandably asks for their $50k back.

So unfortunately at the moment, it seems the only way for the banks to limit their liability with these scammers is by putting strict deposit limits on Crypto exchanges. Highly frustrating, but at least it is happening with good intentions.

I definitely understand your thoughts on this prickly issue @Dangles. The real issue for me is in regards to how tight you make your security. Point being, it's easy to simply lock everything down, maybe create 2,3 or 4FA, set strict limits (even though that customer has passed every identity test and been dealing with the bank for 30years) or block all transactions for a period. Yep, that works for the bank and they then can say it's all good and they foiled the scammers, but they are basing these aggressive tactics on the less than 1 percent cases. For everyone else that have done nothing wrong, well bad luck, we've done our bit for society and for potential legal proceeding that may have followed if we did nothing..

The easy security response is to simply lock everything so tight that it is both impenetrable and unusable. The more difficult response is putting the effort into identity confirmation and other like methods. Not everyone has a gun pointed at their head by criminals as they try to transfer money into a BTC Exchange that is a listed and functioning business in Australia.

Anyway, just my opinion of course and probably amplified somewhat (a lot) by the way i was treated by CBA in this instance.

Yeah, that's what really grinds the gears -- the assumption that you're doing something dodgy. By all means, let's put protections in place, scammers are scum bags that need to be fought.

But a bit of basic vetting would go a long way -- making life harder for the scammers but still giving people control over their own funds.