Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter V who wrote (133466)	7/13/2008 9:32:55 AM
From: Tommaso	Respond to of 306849

It may not be necessary, but if I had two different accounts with balances approaching $100,000 added together, I would put them in two different banks. So simple to do. However, your comment does make me reconsider whether having all our family brokerage accounts with Banc of America Securities is a good idea. I can manage four accounts from one window and three of them get free commissions. Cash balances are usually very small and the securities are owned outright, though naturally in a broker's street name, so ownership of the stocks could not be in question (in the long run). I also keep a very large position in Canadian Oil Sands Trust in certificates issued by the company a physically locked in a safe deposit box. We may see the testing of a lot of these arrangements in the next few years. Especially when the FDIC goes broke.

To: Peter V who wrote (133466)	7/13/2008 9:37:30 AM
From: Travis_Bickle	Respond to of 306849

Misconception Number 1: The most a consumer can have insured is $100,000. Too many people assume — often incorrectly — that if their bank fails their share of all their accounts would be added together and insured up to a combined total of $100,000. Others have notions even further from the truth, such as the idea that the FDIC knows how much each customer has in every bank in the United States (rest assured, we don't) and that the grand total of all those accounts is insured to no more than $100,000. The reality is that your accounts at different FDIC-insured institutions are separately insured, not added together, and you may qualify for more than $100,000 in coverage at each insured bank if you own deposit accounts in different "ownership categories." Suppose you have a variety of accounts at one bank. The funds you have in various checking and savings accounts (other than retirement accounts) in your name alone are insured up to $100,000. Your portion of joint accounts — those with other people — is also separately insured to $100,000. If you also have "revocable trust accounts" at the bank, the total can be separately insured up to $100,000 for each beneficiary if certain conditions are met. (See "misconception number 8.") And, under new rules, certain retirement accounts are insured up to $250,000, up from $100,000 previously. "Depending on the circumstances, a family of four could have well over $1 million in deposit insurance coverage at the same bank," said James Williams, an FDIC Consumer Affairs Specialist. "And that coverage is separate from what is protected at any other FDIC-insured institution." fdic.gov The rules for revocable trusts seem complicated to me, I can't figure out what they mean by "beneficiary" are they talking the current vested beneficiary or the beneficiary after you die (unvested contingent beneficiaries)? "But also consider this example. A family has a living trust account with two owners — a husband and wife — and they name their three children as the beneficiaries. Some people would guess that because there are five names on the account, FDIC coverage is for $500,000. In fact, the FDIC would cover this account up to $600,000 — $300,000 for the husband's funds payable to the three beneficiaries and $300,000 for the wife's funds payable to the same three beneficiaries (assuming that the shares of the three beneficiaries are equal)." Seems they are talking about beneficiaries after you and your wife are both dead (unvested contingent beneficiares).