Pages:
Author

Topic: Chase bank limiting cash and banning international wire transfers November 17??? (Read 6966 times)

legendary
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1032
RIP Mommy

I just got a warning from my bank (Wells Fargo) that the federal government (U.S.) has is going to impose limits on the frequency of access to one's savings accounts.  Obviously the banks is going to comply.  In a nutshell, no more than 6 transactions per billing cycle (with details and exceptions which were described with an asterisk and which I've not found and studied.)

Nothing new, that's FRB Reg. D; think it was originally created in 1980, its current, more lenient form has been in effect since 2009.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_D_%28FRB%29
http://thebutterzone.wordpress.com/2013/02/10/bitcoins-u-s-savingsmoney-market-accounts-dont/
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276

I just got a warning from my bank (Wells Fargo) that the federal government (U.S.) has is going to impose limits on the frequency of access to one's savings accounts.  Obviously the banks is going to comply.  In a nutshell, no more than 6 transactions per billing cycle (with details and exceptions which were described with an asterisk and which I've not found and studied.)

This seems an odd little rule which does not accomplish much on it's own either in terms of inconvenience to Joe users or value for those who may wish to engineer surveillance and control.  I'm not sure why the feds would have bothered unless it is going to mesh with further restrictions (say, maximum transfer values) at some later date.

I think that if things get ugly in terms of capital controls, a lot of people will look back and say "Why didn't I see this coming!?!"

hero member
Activity: 658
Merit: 500
Buy and sell bitcoins,
No restriction on freedom - just a bank looking to increase its fee income.
That's been my feeling, too. I'm not sure how this all got so blown out of proportion. When we start seeing capital control restrictions coming from the state level..... then it's time to worry. (or too late....)

The journalist left out the word "savings account" when he "quoted" the bank restriction.  Its just someone puffing for attention.
certainly got a lot of clicks from the billion places it's posted on this forum!
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
No restriction on freedom - just a bank looking to increase its fee income.
That's been my feeling, too. I'm not sure how this all got so blown out of proportion. When we start seeing capital control restrictions coming from the state level..... then it's time to worry. (or too late....)

The journalist left out the word "savings account" when he "quoted" the bank restriction.  Its just someone puffing for attention.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 508
No restriction on freedom - just a bank looking to increase its fee income.
That's been my feeling, too. I'm not sure how this all got so blown out of proportion. When we start seeing capital control restrictions coming from the state level..... then it's time to worry. (or too late....)
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vgyiuTiQSJ4/Ul7kSj8iuYI/AAAAAAAANlA/NS4r10m--Ws/s1600/161013letter2.jpg

That's normal - savings accounts are not used as commercial accounts because they pay higher interest on the balance and have lower fees.  By moving the funds from the savings account to a commercial account, that limit is removed.

No restriction on freedom - just a bank looking to increase its fee income.
legendary
Activity: 2786
Merit: 1031
Because the bankers will let you what? Move your fiat to bitcoin through coinbase/mt gox when the time comes?

There will come a time, soon, when people won't want to convert from btc to fiat. In the meantime, Bitcoin will continue to slowly suck up excess liquidity until it becomes more liquid than the fiat weighed down by debt.

It will be a very different monetary world in a year or two and Bitcoin is already helping to shape it.


Bitcoin sure will be surging to the top if the world is in big chaos.
But if the world is in absolute peace, then the gov won't have a lot of regulations. Then bitcoin future won't be very sure.

No need for chaos or peace, bitcoin will thrive because it's convenient, and eventually it will become easy to use also.
member
Activity: 107
Merit: 10
PLAYGAME.com
Because the bankers will let you what? Move your fiat to bitcoin through coinbase/mt gox when the time comes?

There will come a time, soon, when people won't want to convert from btc to fiat. In the meantime, Bitcoin will continue to slowly suck up excess liquidity until it becomes more liquid than the fiat weighed down by debt.

It will be a very different monetary world in a year or two and Bitcoin is already helping to shape it.


Bitcoin sure will be surging to the top if the world is in big chaos.
But if the world is in absolute peace, then the gov won't have a lot of regulations. Then bitcoin future won't be very sure.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 508
I've never used a bank wire to buy bitcoins or receive profits from an exchange..... but I suppose if you are trying to move 10s of thousands of dollars at a time, it's probably the most sensible way.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1053
Please do not PM me loan requests!
I'm with Chase, which sucks.
I wouldn't buy bitcoins with anything but cash or a MoneyPak, though. Who needs wire transfer when you have that?
hero member
Activity: 658
Merit: 500
Buy and sell bitcoins,
i don't know about "capital controls", still doesn't add up to that for me. we'll see if more stuff like this starts happening, though...
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1001
Let the chips fall where they may.
My reasoning on this:
Quote from: phillipsjk
I have been thinking about this for a couple of days; and started wondering: are these actually capital controls disguised as consumer-protection legislation?

Wire Transfers are one of the few irreversible transactions that banking system has. As far as I know, it is also the only (legal) way to send more than $10,000 in one transaction. It is unrealistic to expect the International Banking network to suddenly make wire transfers reversible just because new regulation (not law) in the US says so.

This means that International Wire Transfers are essentially barred. As a concequence, transfers over $10,000 are essentially barred as well.

What is interesting is that the OP's bank has apparently found a work-around. They simply have to hold the wire transfer for 30 minutes. Since wire transfers are famous for intermediate banks tacking on fees: the OP's bank eats those as well (raising the price enough to cover it 97 times out of 100).
- Re: Let's clear the air about Chase and other Banks stopping Int'l wires

I my Paranoia is correct, we will see more explicit capital controls in the US within about 2 months.
hero member
Activity: 658
Merit: 500
Buy and sell bitcoins,
so this does or doesn't have to do with, well, capital controls?
legendary
Activity: 2786
Merit: 1031
It can't be true. Too big and no media attention. Even if that is true, it could tremendously help bitcoin. Smiley

It can't be true because you trust the media?
If it is not in the main stream media then it does not happen, it is out of reality. It is the new "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" reality. They even covered up the government against their own regarding the O's spying on them. Now it is but a forgotten memory.

Having say all of that, we should always be conscious about news, especially from people posting links on a forum Smiley

It is not "news worthy": http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1oo0w7/lets_clear_the_air_about_chase_and_other_banks/
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
It can't be true. Too big and no media attention. Even if that is true, it could tremendously help bitcoin. Smiley

It can't be true because you trust the media?
If it is not in the main stream media then it does not happen, it is out of reality. It is the new "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" reality. They even covered up the government against their own regarding the O's spying on them. Now it is but a forgotten memory.

Having say all of that, we should always be conscious about news, especially from people posting links on a forum Smiley
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
It can't be true. Too big and no media attention. Even if that is true, it could tremendously help bitcoin. Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1386
A year or two?

The Federal Reserve won't be able to monetize the US government's debt forever. We've already hit the wall and now we're just waiting for our butts to catch up and slam us into the wall harder.

A year or two, yes.
There seems to be a disconnect between the two bolded statements above. I don't see any indication that this won't be sustained for quite some time -- far longer, perhaps, than a year or two.
Well, at 20T of immediate debt, interest due at 5% would be equal to the total take from personal tax returns.  We are at 17T now, and they are holding things together only by keeping interest at 0%.  So the "year or two" or the "some time--far longer..." translates to how long can the FED keep the rate at zero.

I have thought this has several parts that have to be considered separately.

(A) debt that is longer term like 10 year T bills
(B) debt that is forced on people - like money market accounts which buy the government accounts, or the cash side of stock market accounts which I believe many are forced to hold government debt
(C) US debt that is forced on retirement accounts through pressuring the fiduciary agents.  In this arena US debt is only "one part" - but it is a part.

People are dumber than you might think.  Right now you can get 3-4% on a Australian $ savings account, but in the US you have to go to riskier investments to accomplish that rate of return - corporate bonds and dividend paying stocks. 

As far as I can tell, serious capital flight has not yet occurred.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 508
A year or two?

The Federal Reserve won't be able to monetize the US government's debt forever. We've already hit the wall and now we're just waiting for our butts to catch up and slam us into the wall harder.

A year or two, yes.
There seems to be a disconnect between the two bolded statements above. I don't see any indication that this won't be sustained for quite some time -- far longer, perhaps, than a year or two.
Pages:
Jump to: