Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which banks or financial institutions handled transactions involving both Trump businesses and Epstein-affiliated companies?
Executive summary
Available reporting and congressional inquiries say multiple major banks — including JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank and Bank of America — processed significant transactions tied to Jeffrey Epstein’s accounts; congressional and Senate probes have flagged these institutions and urged DOJ review [1]. Public reporting shows the House Oversight subpoenas have targeted JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank for Epstein financial records, but available sources do not provide a definitive, single list of banks that also handled transactions for Trump businesses [2] [1].
1. What investigators have already said: “Follow the money” led to big banks
Sen. Ron Wyden’s public letter and related Senate Finance work identified “some of the biggest banks in the world,” explicitly naming Bank of America, JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank as having processed billions in suspicious transactions that flowed through Epstein’s accounts and called for DOJ and FBI subpoenas to examine internal bank records [1]. That framing positions global commercial banks — not small private firms — at the center of the financial trails investigators want examined [1].
2. Congressional subpoenas and reporting: JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank in focus
House Oversight actions and media reporting show concrete steps: Oversight has subpoenaed JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank for Epstein financial records as part of its document releases and probe, and outlets such as CNN and Reuters reported those subpoenas and investigations in coverage of the Epstein files release fight [2] [3] [4]. Those subpoenas are documentary — they seek bank records tied to Epstein — and do not by themselves establish wrongdoing by the banks [2] [4].
3. What the mainstream press reports about Trump’s banking ties: limited direct overlap in reporting
The files and press push to release them have spawned intense coverage about who appears in records and who used financial services linked to Epstein, but the available reporting in this set does not list a consolidated roster of institutions that handled transactions for both Epstein-affiliated entities and Trump businesses. CNN and Reuters emphasize subpoenas and released emails but do not present a definitive list proving overlapping bank relationships between Epstein and Trump [2] [3].
4. Why overlap is plausible — and why it’s not yet proven in public reporting
Investigators argue overlap is plausible because major banks serviced many wealthy clients and processed large, sometimes suspicious payments for Epstein [1]. At the same time, public sources provided here stop short of demonstrating that any of those same banks that handled Epstein money directly processed Trump business transactions in the records now public; those specific cross-links have not been enumerated in these articles (not found in current reporting).
5. How different outlets frame the stakes and motives
Mainstream outlets (Reuters, CNN, CNBC, Washington Post, Britannica) present this as a transparency and law-enforcement issue — subpoenas, calls for DOJ probes, and demands to release files [2] [5] [6] [4] [7]. Partisan and opinion outlets frame the release politically: some conservatives argue Democrats are weaponizing the files against Trump while others view the release as overdue accountability [8] [9]. Readers should note those different agendas when evaluating emphatic claims about who did what with which bank records [8] [9].
6. What the new “Epstein files” law changes — and its limits for proving bank overlap
The law signed by President Trump orders DOJ to release unclassified Epstein-related documents in 30 days; it allows redactions for victim privacy and leaves carve-outs for ongoing investigations [5] [4]. That means released files could include bank records that clarify which institutions handled Epstein money and potentially transactions touching other entities — but exemptions and redactions could limit what the public sees [5] [4].
7. What to watch next — records, subpoenas, and DOJ follow-up
The immediate signals to follow are (a) the DOJ’s 30-day production and the degree of redaction [5] [4]; (b) whether Congress or prosecutors unseal bank records showing the same institutions moved funds for both Epstein-linked entities and Trump businesses [2] [1]; and (c) any formal charges or regulatory findings that name banks for failures of anti-money-laundering compliance [1]. Until those documents are public, claims about precise institutional overlap remain unconfirmed in the reporting provided here (not found in current reporting).
Bottom line: major banks — notably JPMorgan, Deutsche Bank and Bank of America — are central to investigators’ “follow the money” leads on Epstein [1], and Oversight has subpoenaed at least JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank [2]. However, the sources available do not yet show a publicly confirmed, comprehensive list of banks that handled transactions for both Epstein-affiliated companies and Trump businesses; the forthcoming DOJ disclosures are the next best source for that specific link [5] [4].