Deposit levies for over 100k accounts to become law

Now the likelihood is rising that tough treatment of big depositors will be written into a new EU law, making losses for large savers a permanent feature of future banking crises.

"You need to be able to do the bail-in as well with deposits," said Gunnar Hokmark, an influential member of the European Parliament, who is leading negotiations with EU countries to finalise a law for winding up problem banks.

The European Parliament has an equal say alongside EU countries when deciding who must bear the brunt of future bank failures such as those now being seen on Cyprus.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-...-push-bail-resolution-law-deposits-over-€100k

Now, who would in their right mind keep more than 100k or any money for that matter in banks in the eurozone, let alone in countries like Spain, Ireland and Italy where there are already troubled banks knowing fully well by law they'll lose a percentage of their money. If anyone still chooses to keep their money in these banks as far as I'm concerned they deserve to lose it for being too stupid to move it.

 

It's also blatantly obvious that Cyprus was nothing but a guinea pig

 

Holy cow!

 

Sounds like the people in charge are trying to bring about the failure of the banking system.

 

Unless you're connected and have billions. Then you'll be exempt, or will be given enough warning to move your funds.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/26/us-eu-savers-idUSBRE92P0NZ20130326

 

Now here's an interesting question I can't find the answer to:

If I have five accounts in two Cypriot banks with EUR99000 in each, are they exempt from this theft or because they are all in my name, are they totalled and I lose either everything above EUR100K held in one bank and 40% of everything above EUR100k in the other?

I've been searching for an answer and can't find anything other the everything above EUR100K. Anyone else seen anything on this?

 

Seen nothing. There are a plethora of related questions including: What about cash in offset accounts (i.e. person is a net debtor)? What about funds held in trust for others (say 100x$1,000 rental bonds)? What about pre-committed but unreleased funds (e.g. $x million for next weeks shipment or this months payroll)? What about Cyprus Govt accounts? etc

 

I believe its on a per account basis. guess you'd have to litigate is it is actually someone else's money (e.g. pool rental bonds etc.).
(I could be wrong)

 

Thanks Guys. Once again, the devil is in the details. Once they have it worked out, it'll roll out.


Wouldn't it good to have the subjects of reading balances sheets and interpreting profit and loss and cash flow statements taught as basic subjects in our schools? That way people would have the basic knowledge to make an assessment of the risks involved in putting their money in particular bank.

 

unallocated for the win

 

if there is a question, they does not exist!

that 's the attitude that would be applied to the account holders, unfortunately.

cry and cry... and its too late.

 

ah eh, do you actually have an account with our bank sir?

bank sar, may be?

SAR-BANK the one with the virus. :lol:

 

That would make people too intelligent. They could do that with anything. Investments, loans, their own household budgets, even government accounts. How could things be fudged or they be forced into unservicable loans then??

 

I have the perfect solution.

Pass a law that 90% of all bonuses paid to bank executives must be held in escrow in bank deposits of the same bank for a period of 5 years before they can be accessed.

Not only will you see a dramatic change in the risk profile of bank operations, in the case of bank failure, those funds can be the first to be drawn on.

 

That seems a fair idea considering the current climate...