SLAYER Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 that if you have a savings account and you make more than four withdrawels in a month tha GOVERMENT will automatically convert that into a checking account. Because in their mind you are using it as a checking account not as a savings account. After further discussion with my banker he assured me this was nationwide to all banking institutions. So to all in the banking field, is this true? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 (edited) that if you have a savings account and you make more than four withdrawels in a month tha GOVERMENT will automatically convert that into a checking account. Because in their mind you are using it as a checking account not as a savings account. After further discussion with my banker he assured me this was nationwide to all banking institutions. So to all in the banking field, is this true? You don't know what you want, the government knows what you want. Will the government also keep you from earning .45 cents a month in interest while paying $5 a month in service fees? Edited February 19, 2011 by MikesVikes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarina Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 I have never heard such a thing. I'm skeptical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Savings acct... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAYER Posted February 19, 2011 Author Share Posted February 19, 2011 Savings acct... Thanks RR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 The Federal Reserve does this to limit liquidity risk in the banking system. To be quite honest, it's not that big of a deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAYER Posted February 19, 2011 Author Share Posted February 19, 2011 The Federal Reserve does this to limit liquidity risk in the banking system. To be quite honest, it's not that big of a deal. says the economist. has it always been like this or just in the last say 5 yrs or so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrumjuice Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 They don't do that at the credit union I am a member of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 They don't do that at the credit union I am a member of. the Fed does not regulate credit unions, so this regulation doesn't apply to them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 says the economist. has it always been like this or just in the last say 5 yrs or so? I think it's been around for a while Overall though, here is why it's not that big of a deal: from wikipedia: In consumer banking, "Regulation D" often refers to §204.2(d)(2) of the regulation, which places a limit of six withdrawals or outgoing transfers per month from savings or money market accounts via several transaction methods. Transactions counted against the limit include "preauthorized or automatic transfer, or telephonic (including data transmission) agreement, order or instruction, or by check, draft, debit card, or similar order made by the depositor and payable to third parties." Transactions not counted against the limit include "mail, messenger, automated teller machine, or in person or when such withdrawals are made by telephone (via check mailed to the depositor)." The law was amended in 2009 to allow greater freedom for the depositor: beforehand, the limit was six withdrawals per month if the funds remained within the same institution (e.g., transfer to checking), but was only three drafts where the funds left the institution (e.g., check, ACH, or card based purchase).[1] The number of deposits or incoming transfers into savings or money market accounts are not limited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Slayer, good post. I posted a similar post some months ago. The info I found from my bank is different and here's what happened to me. F'in bullchit: http://forums.thehuddle.com/index.php?show...Savings+account Weigie loves him some Federal Reserve and he's a contributor to the indoctrination system set in place to brain-wash Americans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) Like Azz and others pointed out in the original post and like wegie says here, seems like a lot of handwringing over what is essentially the definition of a savings account. Besides, it's a savings account. You know, a place where you put money to save it? Money that you don't expect to need for a while. That's why you get better interest, because the bank can more likely count on it being there for a bit. If you want to spend it all the time, then it's really a checking account. That's why banks don't pay you interest (or very, very little) on checking accounts, because it's really just a convenient place to put your money so you don't have to walk around with 1000s of dollars all the time. It's not hard. Besides our long terms savings accounts, my wife and I have a checking account that pays crap for interest and a money market that pays, well, pretty much also crap for interest but better than the savings. Once or twice a month, we check to see if our savings account is above a certain threshold. If it is, we push the extra money over to the savings. If it dips below that threshold (and we're not expecting a pay check or some such), we push it back. Again, no big deal. We actually have a pretty decent amount of money in the MM and yet would likely only stand to profit an extra dollar or two if we were more active pushing it back and forth more often each month to maximize the amount in the savings. Earnings that simply would not be worth the hassle. Even still, I could be all over it and move it back and forth every 5 days and still not go over the limit. This sure seems like a very petty place to get worked up about liberties. Edited February 20, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 This is from the Chase website: Interest RateInterest is compounded and credited monthly, based on the daily collected balance. Interest rates are variable and determined daily at Chase's discretion.1 Account fees could reduce your earnings. Transaction FeesTransaction limits apply. Federal law limits the number of transactions per month on any savings account. Transactions not subject to a Savings Withdrawal Limit Fee include deposits, transactions at ATMs, and in person at a branch. Savings Withdrawal Limit fee: $12/transaction over limit of 6. See the Withdrawal Limitations on Your Savings Account and Withdrawal Procedures and Limitations sections of the Account Rules and Regulations booklet for details. When you understand that banks make loads and loads of money via the fractional reserve system by using your money (by a multiplier of 9) which is then re-distributed into interest bearing loans (of which that money then gets deposited into banks and the whole cycle snowballs), it doesn't seem petty at all. In fact, not only is it not petty, it's the biggest culprit of this disfunction known as the American economy. To then get charged on any transaction over 6 (or any number for that matter) is completely absurd. Nobody should be giving the banks nor our federal government a pass on this or any other law that limits your liberty. This injustice is magnified even more when it deals with your money. If everyone stopped using banks tomorrow we'd be much better off. The banks and laws would change in a hurry to favor us (money savers/earners) provided they don't change the laws requiring citizens to have a bank account (the more likely outcome actually). So no, it is not a petty place to get worked up. It's exactly the right place - banks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 This is from the Chase website: When you understand that banks make loads and loads of money via the fractional reserve system by using your money (by a multiplier of 9) which is then re-distributed into interest bearing loans (of which that money then gets deposited into banks and the whole cycle snowballs), it doesn't seem petty at all. In fact, not only is it not petty, it's the biggest culprit of this disfunction known as the American economy. To then get charged on any transaction over 6 (or any number for that matter) is completely absurd. Nobody should be giving the banks nor our federal government a pass on this or any other law that limits your liberty. This injustice is magnified even more when it deals with your money. If everyone stopped using banks tomorrow we'd be much better off. The banks and laws would change in a hurry to favor us (money savers/earners) provided they don't change the laws requiring citizens to have a bank account (the more likely outcome actually). So no, it is not a petty place to get worked up. It's exactly the right place - banks. Great, then put your money under your bed for all I care. The thing is, they're trying to define what is and isn't a savings account and you seem to have an issue with that. They're saying there are two kinds of accounts. Checking accounts that don't really pay much if any interest where you can move your money around as often as you want and ones called savings accounts that pay more, but you have to chill out a bit and let it sit there. Well, it's a product that you are free to not use if you find the terms to be to restrictive. Those of us who find these terms to be acceptable can use them. That's really it. Those excessive fees and restrictions are neither excessive or restrictive to me because I use the account as it was intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 No, they're trying to gain even greater leverage on you by using your money against you essentially. And you should care about all fees and restrictions because you're doing them a favor by keeping your money at their institution. Why are so many people willing to take it in the a$$ by these greedy banksters? Because you've been conditioned to do so. Don't take my word for it though - just wait until the massive amounts of credit that is out there inflating the value of the dollar begins to deflate at a rapid pace because of mass defaults (already happening). As a result, the banks can then legally opt out of any promise to pay you any of your money because the laws are already in place to protect them (banks). Money market funds can literally vanish because the laws are written to protect the banks, not the clients of the banks. The FDIC won't be able to live up to their promise to insure up to $250K per account because they're already in the red. All the while, keep defending your 'free will' to put your money in the hands of institutions that care nothing about you and charge you on top of making 9x the amount of money you store there. http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-14.htm - This is the official release so the headline appears to be protecting you the consumer. However, scroll to the bottom of the press release and read the section titled "Suspension of Redemptions" which gives the banks legal right to suspend payment on your money. I'm just trying to spread knowledge here. Whether you or anyone else wants to listen and then do some research of your own is out of my control. If more people don't become more proactive in looking for the truth, we're doomed as Americans. Seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 No, they're trying to gain even greater leverage on you by using your money against you essentially. And you should care about all fees and restrictions because you're doing them a favor by keeping your money at their institution. Why are so many people willing to take it in the a$$ by these greedy banksters? Because you've been conditioned to do so. Don't take my word for it though - just wait until the massive amounts of credit that is out there inflating the value of the dollar begins to deflate at a rapid pace because of mass defaults (already happening). As a result, the banks can then legally opt out of any promise to pay you any of your money because the laws are already in place to protect them (banks). Money market funds can literally vanish because the laws are written to protect the banks, not the clients of the banks. The FDIC won't be able to live up to their promise to insure up to $250K per account because they're already in the red. All the while, keep defending your 'free will' to put your money in the hands of institutions that care nothing about you and charge you on top of making 9x the amount of money you store there. http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-14.htm - This is the official release so the headline appears to be protecting you the consumer. However, scroll to the bottom of the press release and read the section titled "Suspension of Redemptions" which gives the banks legal right to suspend payment on your money. I'm just trying to spread knowledge here. Whether you or anyone else wants to listen and then do some research of your own is out of my control. If more people don't become more proactive in looking for the truth, we're doomed as Americans. Seriously. OK, well how is this really any different than the Buy and Hold guys that were brought up in the online stocks thread. Buy and Hold is cheaper than others because they restrict how much you can trade. That's the deal. That's why it's cheaper than other. So, if you sign up for that and then start making mad trades, should you be pissed off that they're charging you excessive fees for using the account in a manner other than which it was designed? Or is it your own damned fault for signing up for the wrong kind of account. You could have just as easily gone with etrade if you knew you were going to trade all the time. But you didn't. You went with Buy and Hold because it was cheaper. And now you're pissed because you couldn't have it both ways. That's really it. You're trying to turn this into a big conspiracy but it's really just banks saying, "This is a savings account. It pays X. To take advantage of that, you need be willing to not go in every other day and dick around with your money. If that's not cool with you, then we have this. It's called a checking account. It doesn't pay anything but you can go nutty with your money." Take your pick. This has nothing to do with how much more money the banks make off what you loan them than what they pay you or whether or not they'll get off scott-free if this whole thing goes south. It really doesn't. Besides, if this thing really does go to the pooper, we're all hosed. Those of us with money in the banks will lose it all. Those of us who bought gold will have heavy shiny bricks that aren't worth any more than rocks, because both can be used to smash people over the head and take their food. Those who actually have money because they kept it under their bed can wipe their asses with it. It will then all come down to guns and food. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTed46 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Like Azz and others pointed out in the original post and like wegie says here, seems like a lot of handwringing over what is essentially the definition of a savings account. Besides, it's a savings account. You know, a place where you put money to save it? Money that you don't expect to need for a while. That's why you get better interest, because the bank can more likely count on it being there for a bit. If you want to spend it all the time, then it's really a checking account. That's why banks don't pay you interest (or very, very little) on checking accounts, because it's really just a convenient place to put your money so you don't have to walk around with 1000s of dollars all the time. It's not hard. Besides our long terms savings accounts, my wife and I have a checking account that pays crap for interest and a money market that pays, well, pretty much also crap for interest but better than the savings. Once or twice a month, we check to see if our savings account is above a certain threshold. If it is, we push the extra money over to the savings. If it dips below that threshold (and we're not expecting a pay check or some such), we push it back. Again, no big deal. We actually have a pretty decent amount of money in the MM and yet would likely only stand to profit an extra dollar or two if we were more active pushing it back and forth more often each month to maximize the amount in the savings. Earnings that simply would not be worth the hassle. Even still, I could be all over it and move it back and forth every 5 days and still not go over the limit. This sure seems like a very petty place to get worked up about liberties. To maximize your $, you should always put all your income in a interest bearing account and then pay a bill the day it is due by withdrawing $ from an interest bearing account keeping your checking acct as a just in time account. This also lowers your exposure to personal identity because they can only steal from your checking account the amount you have in it, assuming you do no have over draft. This is pretty diaper dirtty if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) To maximize your $, you should always put all your income in a interest bearing account and then pay a bill the day it is due by withdrawing $ from an interest bearing account keeping your checking acct as a just in time account. This also lowers your exposure to personal identity because they can only steal from your checking account the amount you have in it, assuming you do no have over draft. This is pretty diaper dirtty if you ask me. I don't want to have to mess around this much. We sit down, twice a month, and knock everything out then. Pay bills, update our finances in ibank, check our budget, and determine whether we want to push money to or from our savings account. I do not doubt that I could squeeze a few more dollars out of my money if I was more active than that, but there's also a quality of life issue at play. Hell, I double the frequency of this practice and get pretty damned close to maximizing and I'd sill have 2 more moves per month to go. But, it's only dirty if you want to have an account that pays like a savings account but you can use like a checking account. And again, how is this any different than Buy and Hold vs Etrade? Edited February 21, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 They claim that ATM, in-person, are not counted. But I haven't seen anything about on-line transfers. Do they count or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 They claim that ATM, in-person, are not counted. But I haven't seen anything about on-line transfers. Do they count or not? Are you referring to my post regarding fees on more than 6 savings transactions? If so, ATM withdrawls do count toward your 6 as do online transfers. I didn't even notice that in the fine print but I know for sure I've been charged said fees based on ATM withdrawals. The only transactions I do from my savings are either online or ATM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 What's a savings account? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 What's a savings account? It's the account that the Federal Reserve and the government are discouraging you from having because they just want you to spend, spend, spend!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 It's the account that the Federal Reserve and the government are discouraging you from having because they just want you to spend, spend, spend!! POWER TO THE PEOPLE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 It's the account that the Federal Reserve and the government are discouraging you from having because they just want you to spend, spend, spend!! How are they discouraging people from having a savings account? Well, at least those who are actually using them as vehicles to save money as opposed to pretending they're checking accounts. Oh, and kindly answer my question about how this is any different than Buy and Hold being cheaper to use than, say E-trade but more restrictive. Or do you think that's an outrage as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Are you referring to my post regarding fees on more than 6 savings transactions? If so, ATM withdrawls do count toward your 6 as do online transfers. I didn't even notice that in the fine print but I know for sure I've been charged said fees based on ATM withdrawals. The only transactions I do from my savings are either online or ATM. From your post: Transactions not subject to a Savings Withdrawal Limit Fee include deposits, transactions at ATMs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.