In what is becoming a clear and predictable pattern, Wise (formerly TransferWise) has joined Revolut in abruptly de-banking Chris Horlacher and companies associated with him.
After successfully opening an account for his operating company and a personal account, Wise began requesting additional verification for his second, less active entity (an IP holding company that collects royalties). Once the trading address was updated to the current residential address in Mexico (as explicitly instructed by Wise support) and a utility bill was provided, all associated accounts were restricted within less than an hour, with a notice that they will be closed on October 7, 2026. Chris immediately filed an appeal, but it was thrown out by Wise in a matter of hours.
The stated reason? Vague language claiming activity “against our Customer Agreement.” Notably, the only “transaction” flagged by Wise was their own $31 account opening fee.
A Second Closure Notice — and an Email Address Never Used
On August 9, 2026, a new message arrived from Wise, this time addressed to an email at the equibit.org domain, the very first domain Equibit Group ever operated from (when it operated under the name Equibit Development Corporation) and one which was still under Horlacher’s control. The email stated that an account associated with that domain would be closed on 23 September 2026. The stated reason was the same formula used earlier: the way the account had been used went against Wise’s customer agreements.
At the time the earlier accounts were created and then shut down, the equibit.org domain did not yet have complete email authentication (SPF, DKIM, and DMARC) in place, nor did it have any kind of email (MX records) settings applied, leaving it vulnerable to spoofing. Only weeks before the new closure notice arrived had those records been properly configured, which is why the message was now successfully delivered.
The timing raised an immediate question. Shortly before accounts registered by Horlacher were rejected, someone appeared to have been interacting with Wise using a spoofed email address appearing to belong to Horlacher that he himself was not monitoring. The new closure notice suggested that an account linked to that address had existed long enough for Wise to decide it, too, should be terminated. Wise formally terminated that account on June 25th, mere days before Horlacher attempted in earnest to open his own accounts.
Formal Complaint and Wise’s Response
A formal request was sent to Wise Support asking for complete details of any account(s) registered under the equibit.org domain, including what identity documents had been submitted, and whether the earlier closures of the first set of accounts were connected to this second registration. The request also asked that, if the original accounts had been closed because of identity poisoning by a third party, those accounts be restored.
On 19 August 2026, Wise issued formal responses to the complaints filed regarding the closure of both the business accounts and the personal account.
In both letters, Wise:
- Denied any third-party access or unauthorised interference.
- Stated that an “older profile” associated with the same details was identified as a duplicate and closed.
- Cited sections 6.2 and 8.3 of their Customer Agreements (accuracy of information and acceptable use) without specifying what information was allegedly inaccurate.
- Refused to uphold the complaints.
A critical chronological problem remains unresolved. On 25 June 2026 — before Chris submitted any new account applications and before email DNS had been configured for the equibit.org domain — Wise sent a closure notice to chris@equibit.org. That address was not yet under active monitoring. The existence of a closure notice sent to that address weeks before the new applications were made is inconsistent with a simple “duplicate profile” explanation.
A detailed follow-up was sent to Wise on the same day the complaint responses were received. It formally requested:
- An explanation of the origin of any profile or account linked to chris@equibit.org and the 25 June 2026 notice;
- Specific identification of the information or conduct said to breach the cited contractual sections; and
- Confirmation of whether any third-party applications using Equibit-related email addresses were detected.
As of the date this article was published, no substantive reply has been received.
The absence of a response, combined with the unresolved timeline contradiction, leaves the official explanation incomplete. All correspondence has been preserved. This episode is now part of the documentary record of the difficulties Equibit Group and its principal have encountered in maintaining basic banking relationships.
This Is Retaliatory Financial Isolation
This is not simple “risk management.” It is part of a broader campaign of financial isolation — the systematic denial of banking and payment services to pressure, punish, and neutralize a target. In legal terms, this pattern raises serious concerns including:
- Economic Duress / Coercion — Using control over essential financial services to pressure someone into dropping legitimate legal action against the state.
- Tortious Interference with Economic Relations — Intentionally disrupting a person’s ability to conduct business and receive income without lawful justification.
- Retaliation for Exercising Charter Rights — Particularly freedom of expression and the right to access the courts.
When multiple financial institutions take similar actions in close succession, it suggests coordinated de-risking based on external pressure rather than genuine compliance concerns.
Core Legal Concepts
Financial isolation (sometimes called financial exclusion or de-risking) is not a single, universally codified legal term, but it is increasingly recognized in legal, human rights, and regulatory contexts as a form of economic coercion or constructive denial of basic rights.
Financial Exclusion / De-Risking
In regulatory terms, this refers to the practice by banks and financial institutions of terminating or refusing relationships with certain customers to reduce perceived risk (reputational, regulatory, or financial). While institutions have the right to manage risk, when done systematically and without due process against protected classes or in retaliation for protected activities, it can cross into illegal territory.
Economic Duress / Coercion
In civil law (including Ontario and Canadian common law), financial isolation can be viewed as a form of economic duress if it is used to pressure someone into dropping legal action or remaining silent.
Tort of Unlawful Interference with Economic Relations
Canadian courts have recognized claims where defendants (including banks) intentionally interfere with a plaintiff’s economic interests through unlawful means. Systematic de-banking across multiple institutions could potentially support such a claim if it can be shown to be coordinated or retaliatory.
Human Rights Angle
- International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Canada is a signatory) recognizes the right to an adequate standard of living, which includes access to banking services in modern society.
- UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights increasingly view arbitrary financial exclusion as a potential human rights violation, especially when it targets journalists, activists, or litigants against the state.
What This Means
In a modern economy, access to banking and payment rails is not a luxury — it is a basic necessity. Systematic financial isolation effectively creates a form of civil death, making it extremely difficult to work, receive income, sustain legal action, or simply exist.
This tactic mirrors historical authoritarian methods of control, updated for the digital age. It is particularly concerning when deployed against someone actively litigating against a national intelligence agency.
Chris Horlacher’s case continues to serve as a public test of whether basic financial access and rule of law still exist for Canadian citizens who dare to hold their own government accountable.
The public record grows stronger with each attempt to silence it.
Read the full Equibit lawsuit documentation and evidence: equibitlawsuit.com
We will continue updating this timeline as more institutions reveal their hand.
Never miss a new article. Subscribe for weekly updates.
