If a bank can issue you a secondary card with an alias name using the Mastercard True Name option (and you have your legal name in the other ones), will that alias be shared with other banks, leading them to ban you? I have found that certain banks ban you simply because you did something they consider suspicious, and they often do not care about your justifications. So, what do you think?
Here’s a passage by Michael Bazzell when he had problems with this matter:
“Contact the credit card company and ask about a secondary card. Explain
that you “no longer identify” with your name given at birth, and would like
your “preferred name” issued on your card. The person you are talking with
might assume you are transgender or dealing with emotional family drama,
but you will never say those things. Many cards are becoming more
LGBTQ+ friendly and may not question your own request to use a different
name. I have had great success with this at Capital One, as explained later.”
"I possessed a Chase credit card in my true name, associated with my SSN. During the application process, I requested a secondary card in an alias name. For my own privacy, I will not disclose the name; assume it was ‘Mike Doe.’ I never used the card that was issued in my true name. I only wanted the account for the secondary card in my travel alias name. This way, I had a credit card in an alias name when I checked into hotels under that alias. Since I had never used that card in my true name, I thought I would have some isolation between me and my alias. This assumption was actually quite incorrect.
A few months after I began using the secondary card, I conducted a query of my own name within the data aggregation service CLEAR. My report immediately identified ‘Mike Doe’ as one of my associates and aliases. This is because Chase shares the details of every cardholder with dozens of other companies. According to their online privacy policy, Chase shares full details of your account and transactions for ‘joint marketing with other financial companies’ and their ‘affiliates’ everyday business purposes.’ In other words, Chase tells others what you are doing. Furthermore, Chase does not allow you to limit or prohibit this sharing. While all credit cards share some data about your transactions, Chase seems to go overboard. Because of this, I have canceled all of my Chase cards, and I no longer recommend them to clients."
If you decide to do this, then you may have to justify why you want to do this and your account may be marked as an LGBTQ+ account holder and may be put on another list.
Now, I don’t currently have nor can I currently list them but I’m sure there will be some long term consequences because this data may also be shared by banks and other financial institutions or service providers. This is almost inevitable.
That said, to answer your question:
Some other banks may or may not ban you depending on how they see the justification for one wanting to use a tool like “Mastercard True Name”. It is hard to say because if you are using this, the other/new bank will need to know if you are using this - so, are you even sure they will? You need to find out if this info is shared with others too. Likely, because the reason for this service/feature to exist is for a certain community, the banks that provide this may not be sharing this on ethical grounds (but they are also banks so they may not have any).
In other words, find out if the bank that’s providing this feature shares info on it and people who use it to other banks or financial institutions in the first place to then evaluate or research further on if the new prospective bank you are looking to open an account with will have a problem with this. This would be a case by case basis on which you’ll have to figure out.
In fact, Michael Bazzell advises saying, “I no longer identify with the name given at birth.” The bank that would presumably allow you the “true name” option is a Dutch neobank, and I live in an EU country (Netherlands are in the EU). Do you think they will share that information? Even if they do, they would likely question me about why I am doing that. I can simply say, as Bazzell suggested, that I “no longer identify with the name given at birth.” But I still obviously going to continue to use my legal name in my country.
I like his approach because he constantly considers the legal matters (he’s an ex-FBI agent, so he knows the law). He says, “The person you are talking with might assume you are transgender or dealing with emotional family drama, but you will never say those things.” He emphasizes, “YOU WILL NEVER SAY THOSE THINGS.” So, I suppose there are legal consequences to stating that you are transgender. Do you think that other banks in my country would force me to use that alias “true name” think to all my accounts? Can a person simply say, “I no longer identify with the name given at birth” to avoid legal and banking problems?
I mean, technically saying that can work… but, the banks will first insist on legally changing your name and then having it changed on your accounts. In other words, I don’t think there is a way to avoid not having your legal/real name/identity associated with your account. At some level, this is for your safety too because the financial institution or even the government can say its not your account or money you are using if its not all verified.
If you’re buying, the purchase/transaction will be associated with your bank and your account and your name no matter what.
This is why XMR exists but businesses can’t use it because its restrictive, volatile, and a goldmine for abuse even it ever became popular.
Imagine buying a gun with XMR in person with professional prosthetic facial makeup/mask as the CIA makes - this will be a nightmare for everybody. This is US specific example but still…
But banks should sill offer virtual cards though. Very very few do and it’s a lot of work for them and very few people asking for it. We need a new innovative online bank with such features.