Savings banks are not like regular banks. Invoking their public-service mandate, they sometimes seem to evade competition: Offering below-average interest rates for depositors, generous executive compensation largely detached from business success, and occasionally embracing a bit of populism. However, unlike their private competitors, one thing they are not allowed to do is choose their customers.

In his introductory round at the International Club of Frankfurt Economic Journalists (ICFW), the new president of the savings banks, Ulrich Reuter, made clear how challenging it is for the public-sector pillar to position itself in the face of the growing right-wing spectrum. Reuter stated that in many legal proceedings, some of which went up to the Federal Court of Justice, savings banks were prohibited from closing customer accounts due to the openly far-right views of their owners.

The logic of this jurisprudence is not entirely unfounded. If public-sector institutions are primarily committed to the common good of the region, it is logical that they cannot discriminate against customers because of their party affiliation. But what if these customers start using their accounts to collect donations for political upheaval and the abolition of the democratic system?

This question is unfortunately not hypothetical. It must be asked and answered after the investigative collective Correctiv documented the secret meeting in Potsdam where neo-Nazis, midsize business owners, and representatives of the AfD indulged in bizarre and constitutionally questionable fantasies – with the organizer openly soliciting donations. Whatever bank holds his account will likely reconsider whether it wants to bear this reputational risk, especially after the report's publication.

The recent shift to the right is problematic for the savings banks because every right-wing electoral success at the local level can propel an AfD politician into the supervisory board. If they take their public mandate seriously, they must prevent opponents of the liberal-democratic order from entering these bodies. A party ban could provide a remedy. Given the many pitfalls and obstacles that stand in the way of this, the question should be reconsidered as to whether these bodies must necessarily be filled with politicians.