New Fdic Rules, Name Virtually Any Beneficiary

Recommended Posts

Posted

While this is not about banking in the Philippines, it could be very good news to many of the forum members who might have retirement accounts or have relatives who might want to get out of the shaky market at this time and yet keep all of their money insured. I hope Tom does not mind me posting it? What it might even mean is that a friend might be able to name you as a beneficiary on their account and get an extra 100k of insurance by doing that.http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2008/pr08086.htmlNew USA FDIC rules just came out and now anyone can be the beneficiary of a trust account and qualify for $100,000 insurance in their name.In other words, you can now put nieces and nephews or even me SugarwareZ-007.gif :36_1_68[1]: :any-help: :lol: on your accounts and each person listed would increase the insurance by $100,000. Good news for any of you or any of your relatives who may have a lot of cash in CD's or want to pull everything out of the market and still keep it insured. The interim rules, which are effective immediately, eliminate the concept of qualifying beneficiaries, so that coverage is based on the naming of virtually any beneficiary. You can go here and test how you would like to set up accounts and it will tell you how much is insured.http://www.fdic.gov/edie/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted

Since your Post survived my own "24-Hour Rule", I will add my comments. This new Rule is not in effect yet, it's part of the Bailout Rescue Bill. (This is McCain's softer/gentler term which is like changing the LA Riots to Civil Unrest)In the '80's the FDIC went from $40,000 to $100,000. Immediately after that, the Savings & Loan fiasco went down. The FDIC was hard pressed to pay the people off that would have been wiped out.The FDIC is almost broke now. Aren't you getting worried that this new coverage is on paper only? Show me the Money!!!Google "Keating 5" and read more on this.Billy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted

Actually Billy I am worried sick. I do think it is a good idea only in that it may stop some people from running on the banks. The USA and the rest of the world are in very bad shape right now and I feel that things are hanging by a thread.One of the reasons I had hoped Tom would allow this thread, is because it may directly affects the Philippines by way of the OFW and their money. If the OFW should go broke, lose their jobs or for any other reason have to stop sending money home, the Philippines will be in a disaster state and God only knows what the results might be. Some people there and in other parts of the world will do whatever they have to do to feed their families and that will no doubt include robbing and killing of the haves by the have not's. That is, if there are any haves left when this all sorts out.I sure hope someone figures a way out of this mess before it becomes the greatest depression of all time.BTW Billy, this new rule is already in effect, the $250,000 change is not."The new rules are effective as of today and apply to all existing and future revocable trust accounts at FDIC-insured institutions."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted

They could do like Ireland did today. They removed all limits to their version of FDIC. This will stop the money going to "off shore" banks from there.The OFW's of Mexico have cut their August remittances 16% compared to last year. I couldn't find and figures for the Philippine OFW's. But my "WAG" is that it has decreased.Billy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...