By: Money Navigator Research Team
Last Reviewed: 09/01/2026
FACT CHECKED
Quick Summary
Yes – in the UK you can be declined for a business bank account even if the only “issue” is that you have no trading history. It’s not that “new businesses aren’t allowed”; it’s that a bank may decide it cannot complete its required checks to a level it’s comfortable with, or that the risk is too high for its onboarding policy.
In practice, “no trading history” usually leads to one of three outcomes: a request for more information, a delay while extra checks are completed, or a decline (sometimes without a detailed reason).
This article is educational and not financial advice.
Why “no trading history” can still lead to a decline
Banks don’t approve business accounts purely because a company exists. When there’s no trading track record, the bank has less real-world evidence to rely on (patterns of income, counterparties, refunds/chargebacks, cash deposits, dispute rates, tax filings, audited accounts, etc.).
That matters because UK banks must take a risk-based approach to financial crime controls and customer due diligence, including verifying identity and understanding the nature and purpose of the relationship under the UK anti-money laundering framework set by the Money Laundering Regulations 2017, and overseen for many firms by the FCA’s financial crime systems and controls rules (SYSC 6.3).
“No history” is rarely the real reason on its own
A decline typically happens because “no trading history” creates knock-on uncertainty in at least one of these areas:
Identity and ownership clarity (directors/beneficial owners, complex structures, overseas links)
Understanding what the business will do (expected activity and counterparties)
Source of funds (where initial deposits come from and why)
Sector/transaction risk (regulated, high dispute/chargeback, high cash, international flows)
Internal policy fit (some providers simply don’t onboard certain profiles)
If you’re trying to map this to our wider coverage, this guide is about the no-history evidence gap; broader decline drivers are covered in Why business bank account applications get rejected.
What banks usually check when a business has no trading history
Even before a business has issued its first invoice, banks will still complete core verification steps. You’ll usually see a mix of:
KYC (identity checks on directors / key persons)
Business verification (entity existence and registration details)
UBO/PSC checks (who ultimately owns/controls the business)
Sanctions/PEP/adverse media screening (risk signals)
Purpose and expected account use (what transactions are expected, typical sizes, countries involved)
Where your application gets slowed down is usually the “expected activity” and “source of funds” pieces – because they’re harder to evidence without invoices, contracts, or a history of account movement.
That’s why many “no history” applications end up as delays rather than instant declines (see Why business bank account applications get delayed).
The practical difference between a delay and a decline
A delay usually means the provider is continuing checks and wants more information.
A decline usually means the provider has decided it cannot or will not proceed under its risk appetite or onboarding policy.
Banks often don’t give detailed reasons. That can be frustrating, but it’s consistent with how financial crime controls and internal policies operate.
Summary table
| Scenario | Likely outcome | Practical impact |
|---|---|---|
| Newly incorporated company, no invoices/contracts yet | More questions / review | Opening may take longer than advertised timelines |
| Business model is clear, but ownership structure is complex | Enhanced checks or decline | You may be asked for more evidence about owners/controllers |
| Directors/owners are overseas or frequently moving between countries | Delay or decline | Some providers restrict onboarding to UK-resident directors |
| Planned activity includes high volumes, international payments, or high refunds | Extra scrutiny | Bank may ask for detail on customers, suppliers, and expected flows |
| Initial funding is a large personal transfer with limited explanation | Request for source-of-funds evidence | Account may not be opened until funding origin is evidenced |
| Sector is classed as higher-risk by the provider | Decline more likely | You may need a provider whose policy permits that sector |
| Information provided doesn’t match public records | Decline | Mismatches can cause automated “fail” decisions |
| Multiple linked businesses / several directors applying at once | Manual review | Expect longer checks, especially around control and purpose |
What “evidence” replaces trading history for a new business?
With no track record, providers look for substitutes that help them understand legitimacy, ownership, and expected activity. This isn’t about “proving profitability”; it’s about reducing uncertainty.
Some typical examples (what’s asked varies by provider) are explained in our document guide: What documents banks check for business bank accounts and the supporting checklist: Documents to open a business bank account.
| What the bank needs to understand | Common “no trading history” evidence types | What it helps the bank do |
|---|---|---|
| The business exists and is correctly registered | Incorporation details, company number, registered address | Match you to official records and reduce impersonation risk |
| Who owns/controls the business | PSC/UBO information, share structure summary | Identify beneficial owners and controllers |
| What the business will do | Plain-English description, website, listings, pitch deck | Understand the purpose of the relationship |
| Expected money movement | Expected monthly volumes, typical transaction size, countries involved | Decide monitoring level and whether activity fits policy |
| Why money will enter/leave | Draft contracts, pipeline evidence, supplier quotes | Validate the story behind expected flows |
| Where initial deposits come from | Funding breakdown (personal savings/investors/loans), supporting documents | Meet “source of funds” expectations |
| Whether the profile is high-risk | Sector classification, licences (if relevant), chargeback exposure | Decide if enhanced checks are required |
| Whether key people present extra risk signals | Screening results, address consistency, role clarity | Assess whether to proceed under risk appetite |
Do banks run credit checks if there’s no trading history?
Often, yes – but it depends on the provider and the account type. Some banks use credit reference data to help verify identity and assess risk signals, particularly where overdrafts or credit features are involved.
We break this down in Do banks run credit checks for business bank accounts? and explains the linkage question in Are business bank accounts linked to personal credit files?.
What matters for “no trading history” applicants is that the bank may lean more heavily on alternative signals (identity match strength, address stability, public record consistency, and the clarity of the proposed business activity) because there’s no account history to observe.
Does turnover or profitability matter if you haven’t started trading?
For a basic current account, the bank is usually not assessing “profitability” in the way a lender would. Instead, it’s focused on whether it can understand and monitor the expected use of the account.
That said, some providers do ask for projected turnover bands or expected activity ranges because they feed monitoring thresholds and onboarding policy. We cover this nuance in Does turnover or profitability matter for a business bank account?.
Why “startups get declined” is often really about risk policy fit
Two businesses can both have no trading history and receive different outcomes simply because:
One fits the provider’s onboarding policy (sector, geography, ownership simplicity)
The other triggers enhanced due diligence requirements that the provider chooses not to resource for that segment
This is also why timing expectations vary widely – see How long does it take to open a business bank account?.
Business vs personal accounts: why “just use a personal account” can backfire
Even where a provider allows very small-scale business use temporarily, many personal account terms restrict business activity. Where a bank sees sustained business-like patterns through a personal account, it may trigger reviews or restrictions.
If you’re comparing the practical differences (fees, protections, eligibility, and operational separation), we cover this in Personal vs business bank account and the broader requirement question in Do I need a business bank account in the UK?.
Compare Business Bank Accounts
Not all providers treat “no trading history” the same way. Some are set up for startups and sole traders with minimal evidence, while others expect a fuller paper trail (or have narrower onboarding policies).
To compare options neutrally (fees, eligibility, onboarding timeframes, and features), use our hub: Business bank accounts.
You can also review provider-specific information here:
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes. A bank can decline if it decides it cannot get comfortable with the information available at onboarding, or if your profile doesn’t fit its risk appetite for that product segment.
In many cases the underlying driver isn’t the absence of revenue – it’s the absence of verifiable signals that help the provider understand ownership, purpose, and expected account activity to the standard it requires.
It usually means evidence of real business activity over time, such as invoices issued and paid, recurring customer receipts, supplier payments, tax filings, or existing business bank statements showing a pattern.
A single invoice or a brand-new payment processor account may not be treated as “history” on its own; banks often look for consistency and clarity about counterparties and transaction purpose.
Yes, many businesses apply before trading begins, especially limited companies that want to separate finances from day one or need account details to be paid.
However, applying pre-trade can mean the bank asks more “future-looking” questions about expected activity, because it can’t rely on past account movement to understand what will happen.
Some providers do, particularly if the activity involves higher expected volumes, international payments, or a sector they class as higher risk. Others ask for a simpler description of what the business does and how money will flow.
Where a plan or forecast is requested, it’s typically used to understand purpose and expected transaction patterns – not to judge whether the business is “good” or “bad”.
That situation can increase uncertainty, because the bank has fewer independent signals to corroborate what the business is and how it will operate. It doesn’t automatically mean a decline, but it can increase the chance of manual review.
The practical impact is usually time: the provider may request additional explanations or documentation to replace what a website, contracts, or invoices would otherwise demonstrate.
Yes. Initial funding is often a key focus for new businesses because it may be the first significant activity on the account. Providers commonly want to understand where startup funds originate and why they’re being deposited.
This isn’t only about large sums. Even modest deposits can attract questions if the story doesn’t align with the business profile, or if the ownership and control picture is not straightforward.
Yes. Where a provider considers a sector higher risk (for example, sectors with high refund/chargeback exposure, high cash volumes, or complex cross-border flows), it may require more onboarding evidence or apply stricter acceptance rules.
With no trading history, the bank can’t check whether real-world behaviour matches the stated model, so sector risk can weigh more heavily in the decision.
Not necessarily. A delay often means the provider is continuing its checks, possibly including enhanced due diligence, and may need more time or information.
That said, delays can end in either outcome. If the bank cannot resolve a mismatch, cannot verify key details, or decides the case exceeds its onboarding risk appetite, it may ultimately decline.
A decline for a current account doesn’t automatically mean your credit score is “damaged”, but the impact depends on what checks were performed and what was recorded. Some checks are “soft”, others can be “hard”, and different providers use different approaches.
Future applications can still be affected in a practical sense because you may be asked whether you’ve been declined before, and because the underlying issue (like inconsistent details, unclear ownership, or policy-fit problems) can repeat if nothing has changed.
Some app-based providers are designed for fast onboarding, but that doesn’t mean fewer checks or guaranteed acceptance. Many still run structured verification and screening; they may simply have different product design and onboarding workflows.
FSCS protection depends on whether the provider is a bank (or operates under a banking licence) versus an e-money institution model. If FSCS protection matters to you operationally, it’s worth understanding how the provider is regulated and how funds are held rather than assuming all “accounts” are protected the same way.
When a business has no trading history, the real constraint is evidence density. Banks are required to understand who they are dealing with, what the account is for, and what money movement to expect under a risk-based anti-financial-crime framework. Trading history is simply one of the richest, most verifiable evidence sources.
Remove that evidence source and decisions become more dependent on:
- (1) how clearly ownership and control can be verified
- (2) whether the proposed activity fits the provider’s policy and monitoring capability
- (3) how easily the provider can corroborate the “story” of the business from documents and independent records.
That’s why two new businesses can look similar to the founders – but very different to a bank’s risk engine.
Sources & References
Money Laundering Regulations 2017 (primary legislation text)
FCA Handbook SYSC 6.3 (financial crime systems and controls)
HMRC Economic Crime Supervision Handbook: when customer due diligence is required
UK Government: register a limited company (certificate of incorporation)
FSCS: deposit protection overview for banks/building societies/credit unions
FSCS: deposit protection limit increase (from 1 December 2025)
Bank of England explainer: what FSCS is and the deposit limit change
FSCS: temporary high balances protection (up to £1.4m for six months in qualifying cases)
UK Parliament written question: risk-based approach to customer due diligence