Talk:Deposit insurance
Economics Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
The line which states that the FDIC insures banks in more than one country needs to be clarified or removed. Puerto Rico is not a country, but a territory of the US. Banks and thrifts there are regulated just as they are regulated in any one of the fifty states, which means that the FDIC is the insurer of federally chartered banks and thrifts as well as state-chartered Federal Reserve members, as required by federal law. Micronesia is not a country, but rather a region made up of various islands, both dependencies as well as independant states. Among them are the Northern Marianna Islands and Guam, both US territories, therefore same rules apply there as they do in the fifty states and Puerto Rico. However, other non-US territory islands' banks would not be insured by the FDIC. As far as the Marshall Islands, it may be possible that its banks may be insured by the FDIC, as the Marshall Islands was a former US territory, though I myself doubt it. That source should be noted if that is in fact the case. If nobody else comments on this, I'm thinking about editing this page after a while. Johnbradleytlh 01:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)johnbradleytlh
Moral hazard
The article should include an NPOV discussion on the "moral hazard" argument that deposit insurance encourages depositors to ignore risks, as in the US savings and loan crisis. It's the reason why some countries haven't introduced it. September 17, 2007 --JamesWim 10:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Europe
Why does the Europe section only cover russia, as far as i know it isn't part of Europe. Shouldn't it get it's own section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.27.34.171 (talk) 18:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Parts of Russia, including the Moscow and St. Petersburg areas, are considered part of Europe and it seems appropriate to include Russia in that section. It would certainly be useful if anyone could add information for other non-EU European countries such as Switzerland, Iceland and Norway. Other EU countries are missing too, notably all of Eastern Europe. Robertbyrne (talk) 03:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Switzerland - needs further clarification
I changed the overview in the Switzerland section to better reflect what the Swiss Federal Banking Commission (SFBC) states in English on its FAQ page here. http://www.ebk.admin.ch/e/publik/bulletin/index.html.
The swiss-bankaccounts.com (domain registered by Micheloud & Cie with a Swiss address) also claims 30000 CHF is protected but I am not satisfied with the reliability of its translation. I believe important statements on deposit insurance should be sourced either directly from the SFBC and/or the banks themselves.
Unfortunately the Swiss banks I looked at so far (Credit Suisse and UBS) do not make this information obvious. I have emailed one of them for precise details, but do not expect an answer (from experience making similar queries).
The SFBC do give some information in English (see cite in article) and a lot in German as bulletins here: http://www.ebk.admin.ch/e/publik/bulletin/index.html.
In case anyone with better skills in German bank-jargon than me wishes to invesigate further, Bulletin 48/2006 is the special "Bankenkonkurs und Einlagensicherung" (bank bankruptcy and deposit protection) which details the changes to Swiss law that came into effect on 2005 August 1. It is in German, French and Italian. The German section detailing the changes starts at page 26. It replaces sections 11 to 13 of existing law (Bundesgesetz über die Banken und Sparkassen if I read it right). Page 30, Art. 37a Kleinsteinlagen appears to say sums smaller than 5000 Franks from privileged depositors will be paid quickly. Art 37b confuses me by starting with "Einlagen, die nicht auf den Inhaber lauten," (deposits not in the name of the owner??) but goes on to state the first 30000 Franks will be treated as if from a second-class creditor, and hence privileged. Deposits from companies will not be privileged. Page 32 Art. 37h includes "b. einen Maximalbetrag von 4 Milliarden Franken für die gesamthaft ausstehenden Beitragsverpflichtungen vorsieht;" which looks like the total compensation cannot exceed 4 billion Franks (for the one bankruptcy I suppose). The next condition specifies some liquidity requirement that I cannot understand, and there I abandon my comprehension attempt.-84user (talk) 23:11, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
British Isles Offshore
Events are chaning rapidly in the Crown dependencies; I will include further info as it becomes available.---- Best, MacBiggles