(Corrects figures in 13th paragraph concerning total reported spending on lobbying.)
NEW YORK/WASHINGTON, Jan 25 - President Donald Trump escalated his conflict with Wall Street on Thursday by filing a $5 billion lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase and its chief executive, Jamie Dimon, alleging that the bank closed several of his and his companies' accounts for political reasons. The suit marks the most direct legal confrontation between the president and a large financial institution to date.
For years, Trump has accused major banks of sidelining him and other conservatives, a charge that JPMorgan and other lenders deny. The lawsuit underscores a broader pattern: while large financial firms have been positioned to benefit from the administration's deregulatory agenda, they now face a policy environment that can be unpredictable and at times hostile - a dynamic that could harm their public standing, influence operations, and prompt a reassessment of how they engage in Washington.
Todd Baker, a senior fellow at Columbia University, summarized the strain: "The industry is losing as many battles as it wins on big issues and the constant pressure and random nature of developments is taking its toll."
The legal action follows a series of moves and threats from the administration that have put pressure on banks. Trump proposed capping interest rates on consumer credit cards at 10 percent, a plan that Jamie Dimon warned would be an "economic disaster." At the same time, regulators in the administration have pursued policies intended to open the field to fintechs, crypto firms and some corporations so they can compete more directly with traditional banks.
White House spokesman Kush Desai framed these developments as delivery on economic priorities, saying "The Trump administration is delivering by shoring up financial markets and cutting unnecessary red tape to accelerate growth." JPMorgan declined to comment beyond a statement on Thursday that "we believe the suit has no merit. We respect the President’s right to sue us and our right to defend ourselves...JPMC does not close accounts for political or religious reasons."
Trump has also made other banks targets. The Trump Organization has filed suit against Capital One, alleging that the bank closed its accounts for political reasons. Trump publicly criticized Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan over debanking and told CNBC in August that the bank declined to provide him with an account. Last year he criticized Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon over the bank's bearish stance on tariffs. Bank of America and Goldman Sachs declined to comment. Capital One did not immediately provide comment.
Nicholas Anthony, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute, suggested the legal challenges could alter bank behavior: "Banks probably will be more cautious moving forward after seeing this reaction, seeing that they’re no longer just under threat of regulatory retaliation, but also lawsuits."
Advocacy and spending in Washington
At the same time that relations with the White House have grown tense, Wall Street has been beefing up its presence in Washington. The eight biggest lenders expanded their combined lobbying expenditures by more than 40 percent to $9.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2025 compared with the same period in 2024, according to a Reuters analysis of disclosures. They have engaged with Congress, the White House and federal agencies on topics ranging from credit card swipe fees to crypto legislation.
The Financial Services Forum, which represents the largest banks, in December launched the American Growth Alliance, a nonprofit the Forum said would spend tens of millions advocating for what it described as "commonsense" policies to promote economic growth. The Forum and the American Growth Alliance declined to comment.
"The biggest question that remains is what steps will be necessary to navigate an administration that has shown a willingness to intervene aggressively and unpredictably in the sector," said Myra Thomas, a banking analyst at eMarketer.
Regulatory wins and capital relief
Despite the legal fights and political rhetoric, regulators in the Trump administration are poised to deliver substantial relief to large banks. Some estimates put potential capital relief as high as freeing up $200 billion in cash for lenders. Banks have welcomed shifts in supervision and regulatory approaches that could ease oversight and facilitate large mergers.
Industry executives remain optimistic about the implications for profitability. When Jamie Dimon hosted a gathering of financial chiefs at JPMorgan's new New York skyscraper last month, attendees left encouraged that regulatory changes would unlock additional profits, according to a person who participated in the event. "There’s just a much more rational approach on focusing on the big, important matters," Citizens Financial CEO Bruce Van Saun said on Wednesday, referring to changes in supervision. "That’s a refreshing change."
Another bank CEO, speaking on background about regulatory issues, said the industry still expects to secure the promised capital relief. Investors have also shown appetite for bank shares on the basis of those policy moves. Brian Mulberry, senior client portfolio manager at Zacks Investment Management, commented that "This case is not likely to move that needle much," and the note that bank shares have largely kept pace with broader markets under Trump's presidency underpins that view.
Ongoing tensions and industry reaction
Even so, the president's shifting approach to financial policy - some of which aims to address voter concerns about affordability ahead of congressional elections - has unsettled many in the industry. Banks said they were blindsided by the credit card rate proposal and have since attempted to influence the administration's affordability agenda.
Executives also voiced frustration that banks are ceding ground to fintech and crypto companies that have found favor with figures close to the president. "I don’t think Trump has a lot of love for the big banks," said Brian Jacobsen, chief economic strategist at Annex Wealth Management. The article cites three industry executives who expressed concern about market share erosion to newer competitors.
While legal confrontations and public criticism create reputational and operational risks for large banks, the combination of expected regulatory relief and ongoing lobbying efforts means the sector's relationship with the administration will remain complex and contested. How banks adapt their strategies in Washington and in the marketplace will shape their exposure to both policy-driven gains and political headwinds.
Key voices and follow-up reporting
The reporting includes statements and perspectives from multiple analysts and industry figures, and additional reporting and editing support was noted in the original dispatch.
Note: This article preserves the factual information reported about the legal filings, policy positions, lobbying expenditures, regulatory expectations and public statements as presented in the source material.