Comments on: Why Increasing FDIC Insurance Is A Good Thing (Just Not the Way Congress Wants To Do It)

By: ddavid

ddavid — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 04:23:50 +0000

Oh and the increase in FDIC Insurance is only temporary, so in theory, the total amount of FDIC insured deposits drops back down to $100,000.

Only in Congress would such stupidity prevail.

Here I thought I was the only one thinking the same. It sure doesn’t help the guy wanting to lock in a CD more a year, as I do.

By: Clayton E. Cramer

Clayton E. Cramer — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 01:23:17 +0000

“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 $100,000 at one insured bank and still be fully insured.”

So it does appear that a married couple is limited to $200K.

By: Adam Graham

Adam Graham — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:49:24 +0000

Actually, the limit for FDIC Insurance is $100,000 per Depositer. Having multiple accounts doesn’t help. It’s still $100,000 per depositer. So, if you and your wife can have $200,000 in the bank in deposits (excluding IRAs which are insured seperately.)

You can do differnt things with titling in terms of trusts, but that’s way too complicated to get into.

By: Clayton E. Cramer

Clayton E. Cramer — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:28:17 +0000

A business might have more than $100,000 in a single account, but except as a transitory thing while paying payroll, that seems remarkably foolish. You move excess funds from checking to savings accounts as rapidly as possible–and I’m a bit skeptical that many small businesses keep such large quantities around as a cash reserve. I’ve had a few occasions when I briefly had $200K in a checking account (while completing a house sale in California), but I moved it within a day or so into a brokerage account to get a better return. And having multiple accounts in the same institution (some in your name, some in your name and your wife’s name) is a way to get around the $100K FDIC limit.