This story was originally published on Banking Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Banking Dive newsletter. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. on Tuesday gave conditional approval for Erebor Bank, backed by billionaire investor Peter Thiel, to receive deposit insurance coverage. The green light marks another hurdle crossed on the crypto-focused lender’s journey to opening. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency conditionally approved the Columbus, Ohio-based compa ...

Net income at US banks rose more than 13% in the third quarter as money in the bedrock deposit insurance fund ticked higher and the number of problem banks went down, according to the FDIC https://t.co/DxPtsZFUad ...

Core Viewpoint - The article critiques the proposal to raise the federal deposit insurance limit from $250,000 to $10 million, arguing it primarily benefits the ultra-wealthy and poses risks to the financial system [7][8][9]. Group 1: Historical Context - The U.S. economy faced a severe crisis less than 20 years ago due to risky lending practices and government guarantees, leading to a significant financial meltdown [3][4]. - The government’s role in insuring high-risk loans contributed to moral hazard, as banks engaged in riskier lending without fear of repercussions [5][6]. Group 2: Current Proposal Analysis - The proposed increase in deposit insurance is labeled the "Billionaire Insurance Act," as it would primarily benefit the wealthiest Americans, with fewer than 1 percent of accounts exceeding the current limit [8]. - Supporters argue that this change would help smaller community banks compete with larger institutions, but the article questions the oversight of banks under such a policy [8][9]. Group 3: Implications for Investment Behavior - Raising the deposit insurance limit may discourage risk-taking among wealthy investors, who are essential for funding innovative ventures [10][11]. - The article emphasizes that risk-taking is crucial for economic growth and should be undertaken with personal capital rather than taxpayer-backed funds [11].

Paper losses at US banks eased in the second quarter and the bedrock deposit insurance fund’s balance ticked higher, according to a quarterly report by the FDIC https://t.co/GIMqCzA6mE ...

Core Viewpoint - Bank of America is set to pay $540.3 million following a judge's ruling in a lawsuit initiated by the FDIC regarding underpayment for deposit insurance [1] Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The FDIC sued Bank of America for $1.12 billion in 2017, claiming the bank did not comply with a 2011 rule that altered how banks report risk exposure, leading to reduced deposit insurance contributions [2] - The judge ruled against Bank of America's argument that the FDIC's rule lacked a reasonable basis, stating that the FDIC was not obligated to create a "perfect measure" for predicting banks' potential losses [3] - The judge determined that the FDIC's lawsuit was filed too late to claim amounts prior to the second quarter of 2013, resulting in the ordered payment covering assessments from Q2 2013 to the end of 2014 [3] Group 2: Bank of America's Response - A spokesperson for Bank of America expressed satisfaction with the judge's ruling and noted that the bank has reserves in place reflecting this decision [4] Group 3: Regulatory Environment - The FDIC's new acting chairman, Travis Hill, announced plans for a comprehensive review of regulations and a more open-minded approach to innovation and technology, including FinTech partnerships and digital assets [5] - The FDIC has recently updated its guidance, allowing FDIC-supervised institutions to engage in crypto-related activities without prior approval, provided they manage associated risks effectively [6]