• 144 days Could Crypto Overtake Traditional Investment?
  • 149 days Americans Still Quitting Jobs At Record Pace
  • 150 days FinTech Startups Tapping VC Money for ‘Immigrant Banking’
  • 154 days Is The Dollar Too Strong?
  • 154 days Big Tech Disappoints Investors on Earnings Calls
  • 155 days Fear And Celebration On Twitter as Musk Takes The Reins
  • 156 days China Is Quietly Trying To Distance Itself From Russia
  • 157 days Tech and Internet Giants’ Earnings In Focus After Netflix’s Stinker
  • 161 days Crypto Investors Won Big In 2021
  • 161 days The ‘Metaverse’ Economy Could be Worth $13 Trillion By 2030
  • 162 days Food Prices Are Skyrocketing As Putin’s War Persists
  • 164 days Pentagon Resignations Illustrate Our ‘Commercial’ Defense Dilemma
  • 164 days US Banks Shrug off Nearly $15 Billion In Russian Write-Offs
  • 168 days Cannabis Stocks in Holding Pattern Despite Positive Momentum
  • 169 days Is Musk A Bastion Of Free Speech Or Will His Absolutist Stance Backfire?
  • 169 days Two ETFs That Could Hedge Against Extreme Market Volatility
  • 171 days Are NFTs About To Take Over Gaming?
  • 171 days Europe’s Economy Is On The Brink As Putin’s War Escalates
  • 175 days What’s Causing Inflation In The United States?
  • 176 days Intel Joins Russian Exodus as Chip Shortage Digs In
  1. Home
  2. Markets
  3. Other

New FDIC Rules of Concern for Large Depositors

Buried on page C3 of today's Wall Street Journal (WSJ) is a story "FDIC Issues New Deposit Rules for Big Banks". While little information is available, what I can find makes me a little nervous. So I am not skewing what was reported, here is a portion of the exact text from the Wall Street Journal article:

WASHINGTON -- The country's largest banks, particularly those more likely to fail, will have to make changes to the way they treat deposits, as federal banking regulators prepare for more trouble in the struggling banking industry. The new rules for large banks will require them to standardize the information they provide to the FDIC on deposit accounts, and to put in systems to automatically post possible holds on very large deposit accounts. Regulators have predicted that more banks will fail, and the FDIC's new rules seek to address those concerns.

The vague "put in systems to automatically post possible holds on very large deposit accounts," is what I am uncomfortable with. Does this mean to prevent a bank run; the FDIC can prevent some large depositors from accessing or transferring their funds?

On www.communityinvestmentnetwork.org, I found these remarks (excerpts below) from FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair to the Exchequer Club of Washington D.C. on June 18, 2008:

Yesterday, the FDIC's Board adopted a final rule to modernize the claims process. The rule reflects the comments we've received on several proposed rulemakings on the claims process issued over the past few years. It also reflects extensive talks we held with industry representatives.

The rule requires that large banks have the ability, in the event of failure, to do several things. They must be able to place holds on a fraction of large deposit accounts, produce depositor data for the FDIC in a standard format, and automatically debit uninsured deposit accounts so that they will share losses with the FDIC.

This approach should give most depositors uninterrupted access to virtually all their funds, thus diminishing the likelihood that liquidity problems for individuals and businesses will lead to disruption in the financial system. To complement the industry's efforts, we have been extensively modernizing our computer systems and expanding our ability to categorize large numbers of claims in a very short time -- one to two days.

According to a Bloomberg article posted today:

The change will help pay off insured deposits as soon as possible and help "maintain public confidence in the banking industry," the regulator said. It will also `"mitigate the spillover effects of a failure, such as risks to the payments system, problems stemming from depositor illiquidity and a substantial reduction in credit availability."

 

Back to homepage

Leave a comment

Leave a comment