What People Think
 |
 |
77% For, 23% Against
Take Action
| Vote on this Bill | |
  |
For |
  |
Against |
| Speak Out | |
  |
Comment on this Bill |
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H.R. 786, To make permanent the temporary increase in deposit insurance coverage, and for other purposes (21 comments ↓ | 4 wiki edits)
H.R. 786 would make permanent the temporary increase in deposit insurance coverage.
()
[903 views]
Savings per :
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
HOODY
February 20, 2009, 5:46pm (report abuse)I'm not clear on this thing, wasn't this part of the TARP that Obama just signed?
W. Battler
February 26, 2009, 7:12pm (report abuse)The current increase will expire at the end of 2009, HR 786 will make the $250,000 coverage permanent. This will benefit business and the general population alike. Please write your congressman to support this Bill.
Cal Citizen
March 6, 2009, 1:12pm (report abuse)I think Rep Barney Frank introduced this bill. Sounds good to me, when will it go for a vote?c9
Jackson
March 7, 2009, 3:35pm (report abuse)I think the bill is a good bill. But I would try not to advertise the connection with Barney Frank. He is no money wizard to say the least.
Midwest Saver
March 8, 2009, 11:12am (report abuse)Increase in FDIC Insurance is long overdue. Retirees and businesses need this added protection. It doesn't matter who sponsored it, let your Reps know to please support it. Thank You.
BusGuy
March 8, 2009, 12:33pm (report abuse)H.R. 786 is long overdue. please write your congressmen/senators to support this long overdue legistratiuon. We must protect our businesses and retirees in these difficult times.
MI Saver
March 9, 2009, 11:32am (report abuse)I also support HR 786, like BusGuy said, and others, write your Reps in Wash to support this much needed ligislation. It will help everyone.
Mike G
March 10, 2009, 12:02pm (report abuse)I support HR 786, does anyone know when it will go to the congress for a vote?
Carol from Conn.
March 10, 2009, 12:09pm (report abuse)Small business owner, I need this protection to stay in business, please support HR 786.
William
March 15, 2009, 12:58pm (report abuse)Does anyone know when this bill will go to Congress for a vote, or it's current status?
James
March 16, 2009, 10:18am (report abuse)William, maplight.org says HR 786 has cleared committee, and is now on the calender, not sure when it comes up for a vote.Hope this helps.
Linda S
April 14, 2009, 11:19am (report abuse)When will this bill come up for a vote?
Sandy
May 20, 2009, 8:00pm (report abuse)The increase was made right after Indymac failed due to fraud & leaks by Schummer. They need to backdate the increase in coverage to cover Indymac in July 2008!!!
Neil
July 9, 2009, 10:15pm (report abuse)Hello, I'm trying to understand the comments that say this bill is "needed." The FDIC coverage applies to each account, not on a per person basis. Under the old limit ($100,000) you can still have $200,000 ($100,000 in each) in two different accounts and it is fully FDIC insured. This is because FDIC insurance is computed on a PER ACCOUNT basis. Is it really a big deal to break your $200,000 into 2 accounts under the old system to remain fully FDIC insured? Am I missing something?
...
July 10, 2009, 11:47pm (report abuse)No Neil, the basic insurance amount is $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank. That means the TOTAL deposits for an individual in a single bank are insured up to $250,000. If you have one account with $250,000 you are maxed out. If you have two or more accounts the total insurance is $250,000 regardless of how many accounts you have.
http://www.fdic.gov/deposit/deposits/insured/basics.html
If there are two people on the account then the maximum is $500,000. And three is $750,000 and so on.
If the insurance increase is not extended we will all find ourselves back at $100,000 on Jan 1, 2010.
Neil
July 14, 2009, 11:16pm (report abuse)Ok, thanks for the clarification. Update my previous post and replace "account" with "bank." I still don't see what the big deal is. Just use multiple banks? You should be diversifying your money anyway?
Neil
July 14, 2009, 11:38pm (report abuse)UPDATE: The per depositor, per bank rule isn't entirely true. This example clearly shows that 2 people can be insured for more than $500,000 ($250,000 each) at a single bank by having multiple accounts:
http://www.ally.com/fdic.html
...
July 15, 2009, 1:14am (report abuse)regardless of what Ally is trying to feed the public, the rules clearly state that the $250,000 limit applies to each depositor's total deposits. Jount accounts do not change that rule. The only exception is IRA accounts. These are insured outside of the FDIC limits. Revocable trusts or Payable on Death accounts can be covered for significantly more but this is because there are multiple "owners" on the account.
Be very careful of what any bank tells you. If it all falls down around their ears they are not accountable for anything they said.
Neil
July 15, 2009, 4:17am (report abuse)From the FDIC website that you quoted earlier:
"Deposits maintained in different categories of legal ownership at the same bank can be separately insured. Therefore, it is possible to have deposits of more than $250,000 at one insured bank and still be fully insured."
The FDIC calculator confirms that the example given on the Ally Bank website is correct:
https://www.fdic.gov/edie/calculator.html
In any case, can someone address my original question about what the big deal is? Just open more accounts (perhaps in a different bank if needed) if you think the limit is too low?
CDB
July 20, 2009, 8:41am (report abuse)Let's get this moving forward. Call your congressperson today.
WB
July 24, 2009, 9:03pm (report abuse)In June congress passed H.R. 1106 for Banks and Credit Unions extending the $250,000 FDIC limit to Dec 31, 2013, and was signed by the President. H.R. 786 is still pending.