FDIC Archives - The Free Financial Advisor

Can Your Bank Close Your Account Without Telling You Why?

October 21, 2026 by Brandon Marcus Leave a Comment

A bank can shut down your account, return your remaining balance, and leave you wondering what you did wrong. In many cases, federal law does not require the bank to explain its decision, even if you have paid your bills on time and never bounced a check.

That can feel particularly unfair when your debit card suddenly stops working at the grocery store. Banks have legitimate reasons to end customer relationships, but their decisions can leave ordinary customers scrambling to redirect paychecks, cover automatic payments, and figure out where their money went. The frustrating part is that a bank may have a reason for closing your account without having to share that reason with you.

However, banks cannot ignore every rule. The circumstances surrounding the closure, the type of account, and the bank’s handling of your remaining money can all affect your rights.

Why Would a Bank Want You Gone?

Banks don’t need to catch you doing something obviously wrong before they decide to end a customer relationship. Your account agreement usually gives the institution broad authority to close your account, subject to applicable laws and regulations. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau confirms that banks and credit unions can close checking accounts without a customer’s permission.

Sometimes the reason looks fairly ordinary. Repeated overdrafts, unpaid fees, bad checks, or prolonged inactivity can prompt a closure. Other times, a bank may flag transactions that appear inconsistent with your usual activity or raise questions about where money came from. A sudden stream of deposits followed by rapid withdrawals, for example, might trigger a review even if you have an innocent explanation.

Banks also have legal obligations to monitor certain transactions and report suspected financial crimes. Federal anti-money-laundering rules can restrict what a bank tells a customer about suspicious activity reports. That means a customer service representative may not be able to explain every concern behind a decision. The frustrating reality is that a bank’s decision doesn’t automatically prove wrongdoing, just as a customer’s clean record doesn’t guarantee the bank will keep the account open.

The Difference Between No Explanation and No Notice

Here’s where the wording gets slippery. A bank’s ability to close an account without explaining its reasons differs from its obligation to notify you about the closure. Those are separate questions, and the answer can depend on the account agreement, applicable state law, and the circumstances.

Some banks close accounts with little or no advance warning. Others send a letter or email explaining that the relationship will end on a specific date. Federal law doesn’t impose one universal advance-notice requirement for every ordinary checking account closure. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency notes that banks may close accounts suddenly in certain circumstances, including suspected fraud or inactivity.

That leaves a practical problem: the bank’s letter might arrive after your streaming service, electric company, and insurance provider have already tried to collect their payments. Even if the closure follows the rules, the timing can create a mess. Check your account agreement for closure provisions, and don’t assume that a history of reliable banking entitles you to a warning period.

Your Money Doesn’t Automatically Belong to the Bank

A closed account doesn’t automatically mean you’ve lost the money sitting in it. Generally, the bank must address any remaining positive balance, although the method and timing can vary. It might issue a check, arrange another form of payment, or require you to contact the institution to confirm your identity and arrange delivery.

Things get more complicated if the bank suspects fraud, receives a legal order, or needs to investigate disputed transactions. Those circumstances can affect access to the funds, and a bank may not be able to release the money immediately. A negative balance also changes the picture because unpaid overdrafts or fees can leave you owing the institution money.

Suppose your account contains $2,400 when the bank announces its closure. That doesn’t mean you should expect instant access to every dollar, particularly if pending transactions or a legal restriction complicate the process. Ask the bank how it will return the balance, whether any transactions remain outstanding, and what documentation it needs. Get the answers in writing whenever possible, especially if the money covers rent or other immediate expenses.

A Closed Account Can Follow You to Another Bank

Losing access to one checking account can create a second problem: opening the next one. Banks sometimes consult specialty consumer reporting companies, including ChexSystems and Early Warning Services, when evaluating applications. These companies track aspects of your banking history, which makes their reports different from the credit reports most people associate with borrowing money.

A closure alone doesn’t automatically prevent you from opening another account. However, an unpaid negative balance or a bank’s report of suspected fraudulent activity can complicate your application. A bank may reject your application even if your traditional credit score looks perfectly respectable. Your credit score and your banking history are two different records, and they don’t always tell the same story.

If a new bank denies your application because of information in a checking account report, federal law generally entitles you to an adverse-action notice identifying the reporting company. You can request a free copy of the report and dispute inaccurate information with both the reporting company and the institution that supplied it.

Don’t assume a bank’s unexplained closure means you have a black mark against your name, though. The institution may have closed the account for internal reasons without reporting negative information. Find out what the record actually says before drawing conclusions.

What To Do When Your Account Suddenly Closes

When a bank closes your account unexpectedly, start with the practical problems rather than trying to solve the mystery immediately. Contact the bank through its official phone number or secure website, and ask whether the account has closed permanently or whether a temporary restriction prevents access. Request instructions for retrieving your balance and settling any outstanding transactions.

Next, protect your incoming and outgoing payments. Tell your employer or benefits provider where to send future deposits, and update recurring payments for rent, utilities, insurance, and loan installments. Check whether any recent checks or electronic payments might bounce. A payment that fails because an account closed can trigger fees from another company, even when you didn’t initiate the closure.

Keep copies of notices, transaction records, and messages with bank representatives. If the bank won’t resolve the problem, submit a written complaint to the institution’s appropriate regulator. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau also accepts complaints about bank accounts and other consumer financial products.

One more precaution: don’t click links in unexpected texts claiming that your bank closed your account. Scammers love a believable financial emergency, especially one that makes people act before thinking. Contact the bank independently using verified contact details.

The Bank May Keep Its Reasons, but You Still Have Options

Banks generally have considerable freedom to end customer relationships, and they don’t always have to explain their reasoning. That can leave customers without the satisfying answer they want, particularly when they believe they’ve done nothing wrong. Still, an unexplained closure doesn’t automatically mean misconduct, fraud, or a damaged credit record.

Focus on what you can establish. Find out how to recover your money, redirect payments, and check whether the closure affected your banking history. If a report contains errors, challenge them rather than accepting the record as permanent. And if the bank mishandles your funds or fails to follow an applicable legal requirement, pursue the appropriate complaint process.

Has a bank ever closed an account you expected to keep open? What explanation, if any, did the bank provide, and how did you handle the switch?

Federal Regulators Double Bank Asset Threshold for 18-Month Examination Cycle to $6 Billion

September 14, 2026 by Amanda Blankenship Leave a Comment

18-month bank examination cycle — Federal banking regulators have raised the asset threshold from $3 billion to $6 billion for certain qualifying institutions to use an 18-month on-site examination cycle instead of the standard 12-month schedule. dennizn/Shutterstock

Some community banks may now go six additional months between regularly scheduled federal on-site examinations after regulators doubled the asset threshold for institutions eligible for an extended examination cycle.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Reserve Board and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation have issued an interim final rule raising the threshold from $3 billion to $6 billion in total assets.

The change took effect September 14, 2026, and implements a provision of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act.

For bank customers, the important distinction is that the rule doesn’t eliminate federal oversight or automatically give every bank below $6 billion an 18-month examination schedule. The longer cycle is intended for qualifying institutions with relatively low-risk profiles that meet additional supervisory requirements.

What Changed for Community Banks

Federal law generally requires insured depository institutions to receive a full-scope, on-site examination at least once every 12 months.

Certain smaller institutions that satisfy additional requirements, however, can qualify for an examination every 18 months instead.

Until this change, the relevant asset ceiling was $3 billion. The new rule raises that threshold to less than $6 billion, potentially allowing more community banks to use the extended schedule.

According to the OCC, approximately 50 additional OCC-regulated institutions are expected to become eligible for the 18-month examination cycle because of the higher threshold.

The Federal Reserve, FDIC and OCC said extending the examination cycle can reduce the time and resources low-risk institutions devote to the examination process.

A Bank Doesn’t Qualify Based on Size Alone

A bank having $5 billion in assets doesn’t automatically mean federal examiners will visit only once every 18 months.

Federal regulators emphasize that institutions must satisfy qualifying criteria for the extended examination schedule. Those requirements include being considered well capitalized and well managed.

The rule is designed for smaller institutions with relatively low-risk profiles rather than giving every bank under the new asset ceiling an automatic six-month extension.

Regulators also aren’t going completely hands-off during the longer interval.

The agencies said they will continue their existing practice of off-site monitoring between scheduled examinations for institutions using the extended cycle.

That distinction matters for depositors who might see the phrase “fewer bank examinations” and assume federal oversight is disappearing. The change affects the normal schedule for qualifying full-scope on-site examinations; it doesn’t mean regulators stop monitoring a bank for 18 months.

Why Regulators Say the Change Is Needed

Federal regulators describe the rule as a way to reduce unnecessary regulatory burden on community banks that have already demonstrated stronger financial and managerial characteristics.

A full bank examination can require significant staff time and resources as examiners evaluate areas including financial condition, management, risk controls and compliance with applicable laws.

Moving a qualifying institution from a 12-month to an 18-month cycle gives it another six months between those regularly scheduled examinations.

The agencies argue that this is appropriate for smaller, well-managed and well-capitalized institutions with lower-risk profiles.

OCC officials have also framed the change as part of a broader effort to tailor supervision to the size, complexity and risk of community banks rather than applying the same regulatory burden to every institution.

U.S. Operations of Some Foreign Banks Are Included Too

The rule isn’t limited to domestic community banks.

The OCC, Federal Reserve and FDIC are also making corresponding changes to regulations governing the examination cycles of qualifying U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks.

Those changes are being made consistent with requirements under the International Banking Act of 1978.

As with domestic institutions, meeting the asset threshold alone doesn’t necessarily establish eligibility for the longer examination cycle. The applicable regulatory requirements still have to be satisfied.

What Does This Mean for Bank Customers?

For the typical checking or savings account customer, there is no immediate action to take.

The rule doesn’t change the balance in an account, the interest rate a bank pays or the basic way customers access their money.

It also doesn’t change the standard FDIC deposit insurance amount. At an FDIC-insured bank, deposits are generally automatically insured to at least $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, for each account ownership category.

Instead, this is primarily a change in how frequently certain qualifying banks undergo their regularly scheduled full-scope federal on-site examinations.

Customers concerned about the financial condition of a bank can still verify whether an institution is FDIC insured and review publicly available information about it rather than attempting to determine safety based solely on whether its normal examination cycle is 12 or 18 months.

The Rule Is Already in Effect, but Regulators Want Comments

The agencies issued the change as an interim final rule, which means it took effect upon publication while regulators are still accepting public comments.

The Federal Reserve identifies the proposal as Docket No. R-1898, while OCC materials identify Docket ID OCC-2026-0761.

Comments are being accepted for 30 days following publication in the Federal Register.

The immediate takeaway for consumers is fairly limited: some additional community banks that satisfy federal safety, management and other qualifying standards can now move from annual on-site examinations to an 18-month schedule.

For the banks themselves, however, regulators say those additional six months can reduce examination-related time and costs while off-site supervision continues between scheduled exams.

What to Read Next

What Actually Happens to the Money in Your Bank Account When You Die?

Why Banks Sometimes Close Accounts Without Warning

You Can Pay the IRS Directly From Your Bank Account for Free—No Registration Required

Amanda Blankenship

Amanda Blankenship is the Chief Editor for District Media. With a BA in journalism from Wingate University, she frequently writes for a handful of websites and loves to share her own personal finance story with others. When she isn’t typing away at her desk, she enjoys spending time with her daughter, son, husband, and dog. During her free time, you’re likely to find her with her nose in a book, hiking, or playing RPG video games.

Are You Being Underpaid on Your Savings? The Latest FDIC Numbers Give You a Benchmark

September 13, 2026 by Brandon Marcus Leave a Comment

A savings account can look perfectly respectable until its interest rate gets compared with what other banks pay. The FDIC’s latest national average puts the typical savings account at just 0.38%, while competitive high-yield savings accounts currently offer rates around 4% or more.

That difference matters because the money sitting in a savings account does not take a day off. It keeps waiting, month after month, whether the bank rewards it generously or barely tosses it a few crumbs. This FDIC number gives savers a useful benchmark for deciding whether a bank deserves to keep earning their business.

The FDIC Number Is a Benchmark, Not a Gold Star

The FDIC reports a national savings rate of 0.38% for September 2026, a figure that reflects the average rate paid across insured institutions and credit unions included in its data. The agency calculates the national rate using deposit-weighted averages, which means larger institutions have more influence on the figure than smaller banks.

That distinction matters because 0.38% does not represent the best rate available to consumers. It represents what the broad market pays on average, so a bank paying around that amount does not necessarily offer a competitive deal just because it matches the national figure. Think of the FDIC number as the floor for comparison, not a trophy your bank gets for participation.

A Savings Account Can Be Safe and Still Pay Poorly

A common misconception involves confusing a bank’s safety with the quality of its interest rate. FDIC insurance can protect eligible deposits at an insured bank within applicable coverage limits, but that protection does not force the bank to pay a competitive yield.

That means a familiar brick-and-mortar bank can provide perfectly legitimate deposit insurance while still paying a surprisingly small amount on savings. There is nothing inherently wrong with keeping money there, especially if convenient branches, existing banking relationships, or other services matter to the household. But convenience should not automatically come with a permanent discount on the interest earned.

The Gap Between 0.38% and 4% Is Hard to Ignore

Current high-yield savings accounts can offer rates around 4% or higher, depending on the institution and account terms. That creates a substantial spread between what a typical savings account pays and what a competitive account can offer.

Consider someone with a sizeable emergency fund sitting untouched for months or years. A rate difference that looks tiny on a bank website can translate into a meaningful amount of interest over time, particularly as the balance grows. The money does not need to become an investment portfolio to earn more, either, because a qualifying deposit account can provide access to cash while potentially paying a much better yield.

Before Moving Your Money, Check the Fine Print

A flashy APY deserves a closer look before anyone starts transferring money. Some accounts require minimum balances, direct deposits, linked accounts, specific activity, or other conditions before customers receive the advertised rate, while promotional rates can also come with expiration dates.

Liquidity matters, too, because a savings account serves a different purpose from a certificate of deposit. A CD can lock in a rate for a set term, while a savings account generally provides easier access to cash, although each institution sets its own withdrawal and account rules. A slightly lower rate with no hoops may make more sense for an emergency fund than a higher rate that creates headaches every time money needs to move.

Your Bank May Not Volunteer a Better Deal

Banks do not necessarily send a parade to your front door when another institution starts paying more on savings. Customers often need to check their current APY, compare it with competing offers, and decide whether the difference justifies changing accounts.

The comparison does not need to become a weekend-long research project. Start with the rate shown on the current account statement or online banking page, compare it with the FDIC benchmark, then look at several competitive savings accounts and their requirements. If the current rate sits near the national average while another insured account offers a substantially higher APY without burdensome conditions, that deserves a serious look.

Make Your Savings Rate Earn Its Place

The FDIC’s 0.38% national average gives savers a useful reality check, but it should not become an excuse to settle for a mediocre rate. A bank can provide excellent customer service, convenient branches, and FDIC insurance while still paying less interest than a competitor.

The smartest comparison considers the whole package, including APY, fees, minimum balances, access to cash, account requirements, and insurance coverage. Rates can change, so a winning account today may not remain the winner forever, which makes an occasional rate check worth the few minutes it takes.

If your savings account pays something close to the FDIC average, it may be time to ask a simple question: Is your bank giving your money a good home, or merely a place to sit?

7 Bank Accounts Worth Rechecking After the FDIC’s Latest National Rate Update

September 9, 2026 by Brandon Marcus Leave a Comment

A bank account can sit quietly for years while the interest rate attached to it changes around it. That makes the FDIC’s latest national rate update a useful excuse to revisit where cash actually lives, especially when a familiar account may now look less attractive than it did when it first opened. The latest available update, released in August 2026, shows national averages ranging from just 0.07% for interest checking to 1.71% for a 12-month CD.

Those figures do not tell anyone which bank offers the best deal, and that distinction matters. The FDIC national rates represent averages, not shopping recommendations, so a bank that pays far more than the average can sit right beside one that pays practically nothing. The next update arrives September 21, which gives account holders a handy reason to check the fine print now rather than letting another month of interest quietly wander off.

1. Regular Savings Accounts

A plain savings account earns the first inspection because it often holds money that could earn considerably more without sacrificing easy access. The FDIC’s August 2026 national average for savings stood at 0.38%, a figure that makes a traditional low-yield account worth questioning if it has become the permanent parking spot for a sizable cash balance.

The practical question involves the actual APY on the account, not the name printed on the statement. Check for minimum-balance requirements, monthly fees, introductory rates and restrictions that could turn an attractive advertised rate into something much less useful. If the account pays little while another insured savings account offers a materially higher rate with similar access, moving the money may merit serious consideration.

2. Interest-Bearing Checking Accounts

Checking accounts rarely inspire excitement, but money sitting there can still earn something while waiting to pay the electric bill. The FDIC’s August national average for interest checking reached only 0.07%, which makes a quick rate check particularly worthwhile for anyone keeping a substantial everyday balance.

Some checking accounts advertise impressive yields, but those offers often come with conditions. Direct deposit requirements, debit-card transactions, balance limits or other hoops can determine whether the advertised APY actually applies to the entire balance. Before switching, compare those requirements with normal spending habits because an account that demands a monthly obstacle course can become more trouble than the extra interest warrants.

3. Money Market Accounts

Money market deposit accounts sit in an interesting middle ground because they can offer savings features while sometimes providing easier access to funds. The FDIC placed the national average money market rate at 0.63% in August, higher than the average for both savings and interest checking accounts.

That difference does not automatically make every money market account the winner. Compare the rate, minimum balance, fees, transaction rules and access features against a high-yield savings account before moving cash. A money market account can make sense for money that needs liquidity, but there is little reason to pay for extra complexity when another account offers comparable access and a better yield.

4. One-Month CDs

A one-month CD sounds wonderfully tidy until the rate enters the conversation. The FDIC’s August national average for a one-month CD was just 0.22%, which makes this particular term worth examining before locking up cash simply because the commitment feels short.

Short does not automatically mean useful. A CD also can impose an early-withdrawal penalty, and the issuing bank sets the specific terms. If a one-month CD pays less than a readily accessible savings option, the loss of flexibility can make the arrangement look rather silly. Check the actual APY and penalty before treating a short CD as a clever little cash-management trick.

5. Three-Month CDs

Three-month CDs deserve their own review because they occupy a different spot on the rate curve. The FDIC’s August national average reached 1.14%, substantially above the one-month average but still far below many competitive offers available from individual institutions.

That gap creates an important lesson: an FDIC average represents the market as a whole, not the rate a saver should automatically accept. Someone with cash that will remain untouched for three months can compare actual CD offers and then weigh the yield against the inconvenience of locking up the money. The calendar matters, too, because a three-month CD makes much more sense for money with a predictable future use than for an emergency fund that might need to escape tomorrow morning.

6. Six-Month CDs

Six-month CDs should get another look when cash has a firm job but does not need immediate access. The FDIC reported a 1.41% national average for six-month CDs in August 2026, putting this term above the shorter CD averages.

Still, the rate alone should not make the decision. Check whether the CD automatically renews, what happens at maturity and how much the bank charges for an early withdrawal. A six-month commitment can work nicely for money earmarked for a known expense, but emergency savings should not take a vacation inside a CD with an inconvenient exit door.

7. Twelve-Month CDs

The 12-month CD stands out in the latest numbers because its 1.71% national average exceeds the averages for the shorter and longer CD terms. The FDIC data show the average falling after the one-year mark, with two-year CDs at 1.57%, three-year CDs at 1.34%, four-year CDs at 1.27% and five-year CDs at 1.36%.

That pattern makes blindly choosing the longest CD a particularly questionable move. A longer term does not automatically deliver a higher rate, and tying up money for several years deserves a clear reason beyond the word “CD” appearing in the product name. Compare the one-year offer with shorter and longer terms, consider when the money will become useful, and remember that the FDIC national average serves as a benchmark rather than a ceiling on what a shopper can find.

The Rate Check That Could Pay for Itself

The biggest takeaway from the latest FDIC update involves comparison rather than any single percentage. Savings, checking, money market accounts and CDs all serve different jobs, so the best account depends on when the money needs to move and how much flexibility it requires.

A quick account audit can reveal an old checking account earning almost nothing, a savings account carrying a stale rate or a CD that no longer fits the original plan. The FDIC’s numbers provide a useful measuring stick, while the actual APYs, fees and withdrawal rules at individual banks provide the information needed to make a decision. With another national update scheduled for September 21, there is little reason to let a forgotten rate continue collecting interest for the bank instead of the account holder.

Which bank account are you considering rechecking after the latest FDIC rate update, and what would make you switch?

7 Bank-Safety Red Flags Emerging After FDIC Banks Posted $90.1B in Quarterly Profits

September 8, 2026 by Brandon Marcus Leave a Comment

The nation’s FDIC-insured banks just posted $90.1 billion in net income for the second quarter of 2026, a 12% jump from the previous quarter. That sounds like excellent news for the banking industry, and it is, but a healthy industry does not automatically mean every bank customer has a perfectly protected account.

The bigger takeaway involves what happens around the banking system, where scammers, fraudsters, and increasingly convincing impersonators keep looking for openings. A suspicious text, an unfamiliar withdrawal, or a request to “move your money for safety” can turn an ordinary Tuesday into a financial headache remarkably fast. Here are seven red flags worth taking seriously.

1. A “Bank Fraud Alert” Wants Immediate Action

A message claiming to come from a bank can look remarkably convincing, complete with familiar logos, official-sounding language and a frightening warning about suspicious activity. The red flag appears when the message pushes for a password, account number, security code or payment instead of directing the customer to contact the bank through a trusted channel.

That urgency deserves skepticism because scammers want people reacting before they start asking questions. A safer move involves opening the bank’s official app or typing its website address manually, then contacting the institution through a verified number. Caller ID, email addresses and even voices can provide false reassurance because scammers can fake them.

2. Someone Says the Money Needs to “Move”

Few banking red flags deserve a brighter flashing light than a stranger telling someone to transfer money into another account to keep it safe. Real financial institutions do not need customers to protect their deposits by sending funds to a stranger’s account, buying cryptocurrency or handing over cash. The FTC specifically warns that fake bank security alerts can convince victims to move money while believing they are protecting it.

This scam can feel especially believable when the caller already knows some personal information. That detail does not prove the caller represents the bank, however, so the safest response involves ending the conversation and contacting the institution independently. Money already sent through certain payment methods can become difficult to recover, which makes hesitation a valuable financial tool.

3. An Unfamiliar Transaction Gets Ignored

A tiny unfamiliar charge can seem too insignificant to bother investigating, but it can signal that someone has obtained access to an account or payment information. Account holders should review transactions regularly and contact the bank promptly when something looks wrong.

Federal protections can depend on the type of transaction and how quickly the customer reports it. For example, a customer who loses a debit card and reports the loss within two business days generally faces a much smaller potential liability than someone who waits. Waiting for a suspicious transaction to become a bigger problem rarely improves the situation.

4. The Account Holds More Than Deposit Insurance Covers

Seeing the FDIC name attached to a bank can create a comforting sense that every dollar inside the institution carries the same protection. That assumption can cause trouble because FDIC insurance protects eligible deposits at insured banks, not every financial product a bank might offer. Investment products such as stocks, bonds and mutual funds do not receive FDIC deposit insurance simply because a bank sells them.

Customers with large balances also should check how deposit insurance applies to their specific ownership categories and accounts. The FDIC provides tools that customers can use to check coverage instead of relying on a quick glance at an account statement. Bank safety involves knowing not only where the money sits, but also what protections actually apply to it.

5. A Bank’s Security Process Suddenly Feels Strange

A legitimate bank may occasionally ask customers to verify information, but an unexpected request for passwords, one-time codes or sensitive account details should trigger caution. The CFPB warns that phishing messages can imitate banks and encourage customers to click links or provide information that scammers can use.

The safest habit involves treating unexpected requests as untrusted until the bank confirms them through an independent channel. Never use the phone number or link supplied inside a suspicious message to investigate the message itself. That creates the digital equivalent of asking a burglar whether the back door looks secure.

6. A Caller Knows Just Enough to Sound Legit

Scammers increasingly build credibility by combining personal details with familiar banking language. A caller might know a customer’s name, mention a recent purchase or claim to see a suspicious transaction, then ask for a security code to “fix” the problem.

That performance can feel convincing because the information sounds private, but it does not prove the caller has legitimate access to the account. The CFPB warns that caller ID and other forms of apparent verification can get faked, while voices can even get cloned. Customers should hang up and call the financial institution using a trusted number instead.

7. A Bank Problem Gets More Urgent the Longer You Wait

Bank fraud rarely improves through procrastination. When an account holder spots an unauthorized transaction, contacting the bank quickly can preserve important protections and give the institution a chance to investigate while the details remain fresh.

The CFPB says banks generally have 10 business days to investigate an unauthorized electronic transaction after notification, although specific circumstances can change the timeline. Customers should also keep records of suspicious transactions, messages and conversations with the bank because documentation can make a dispute much easier to manage.

A Profitable Banking System Still Needs Vigilant Customers

The FDIC’s latest numbers paint a broadly strong picture, with insured institutions reporting $90.1 billion in second-quarter net income and strong capital and liquidity levels. That should not create a false choice between confidence and caution because both can exist at the same time.

The smartest bank-safety habits remain wonderfully unglamorous: check transactions, question unexpected requests, protect login information, verify suspicious messages independently, and report unauthorized activity quickly. A profitable banking industry can provide stability, but everyday account security still depends heavily on the choices made when something feels just a little off.

What is the strangest bank-related text, call, or account activity you have encountered, and how did you handle it?

FDIC Changes Reciprocal Deposit Rules for Banks Under New Housing Law

September 2, 2026 by Amanda Blankenship Leave a Comment

FDIC reciprocal deposit rules — The FDIC’s new reciprocal-deposit rule took effect September 1, 2026, increasing the amount qualifying banks can exclude from brokered-deposit treatment under a tiered calculation capped at $30 billion. The rule also expands which well-capitalized institutions can qualify for the exception. nmoyPhoto/Shutterstock

Banks participating in reciprocal deposit networks have new federal rules to follow after the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation implemented changes Congress made to how certain deposits are treated under banking regulations. The FDIC’s interim final rule took effect September 1 and implements Section 902 of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which became law on July 11, 2026. The change primarily affects banks and their compliance teams rather than requiring customers to take immediate action. However, reciprocal deposits are an important tool that some banks use to help customers obtain FDIC insurance coverage for deposits exceeding the standard insurance limit at a single institution.

What Are Reciprocal Deposits?

A reciprocal deposit arrangement can allow a customer to place a large amount of money with one participating bank while portions of those funds are placed at other participating insured institutions. In return, the original bank receives deposits placed through the network by other institutions.

The arrangement can allow a customer to maintain a relationship with one bank while potentially receiving FDIC insurance coverage across multiple institutions, subject to applicable insurance rules and program terms. That’s particularly useful for businesses, municipalities and individuals holding deposits that exceed the standard FDIC insurance limit. The regulatory question for banks is whether those reciprocal deposits must be classified as “brokered deposits.” Federal law places additional restrictions and regulatory requirements on brokered deposits, particularly when an institution’s financial condition deteriorates.

The New Law Raises the Reciprocal Deposit Cap

Congress changed the reciprocal-deposit framework when the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act became law this summer. Under the new law and the FDIC’s implementing rule, qualifying “agent institutions” can exclude a larger amount of reciprocal deposits from being classified as brokered deposits. The new general cap uses a tiered calculation based on an institution’s total liabilities.

For the first $1 billion in liabilities, the calculation uses 50%. For liabilities above $1 billion and up to $10 billion, it adds 40% of that portion. For liabilities exceeding $10 billion, it adds 30% of that portion. The resulting general cap cannot exceed $30 billion.

That replaces the previous framework under which the general cap was generally the lesser of $5 billion or 20% of the institution’s total liabilities.

More Banks May Qualify as “Agent Institutions”

The rule also changes which banks can qualify for the reciprocal-deposit exception. Previously, an institution generally needed to be well capitalized and have a composite condition rating of 1 or 2 under the applicable supervisory rating system, among other potential ways to qualify.

The new law expands the definition to include institutions that are well capitalized and have a composite rating of 3. That change could allow additional institutions to make use of the reciprocal-deposit exception.

The FDIC’s rule also clarifies how institutions can requalify as agent institutions after circumstances change, such as a supervisory rating change, capital-category change, approval of a brokered-deposit waiver or reduction in reciprocal deposits below the applicable special cap.

What Does This Mean for Bank Customers?

For most consumers with ordinary checking and savings balances, the rule doesn’t require any immediate action. Its more direct impact is on financial institutions that participate in reciprocal-deposit networks and on customers with larger balances who use those services. Reciprocal-deposit networks can allow banks to retain relationships with customers whose deposits exceed the standard FDIC insurance limit by placing portions of the money with other participating insured institutions.

Customers shouldn’t assume, however, that simply participating in a reciprocal-deposit program automatically makes every dollar in every situation FDIC-insured. Deposit insurance depends on factors including account ownership category, how funds are placed and the institutions where deposits ultimately reside. Customers with large balances should review their specific arrangement and deposit-insurance coverage with their bank.

The FDIC Is Still Accepting Comments

Although the rule took effect September 1, it is an interim final rule, and the FDIC is requesting public comments. Comments must be received by October 1, 2026. The Federal Register notice says comments should reference RIN 3064-AG32 and can be submitted through the FDIC’s Federal Register publications page, by email or by mail.

The FDIC also says it will work with the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council to update bank Call Report instructions to reflect the statutory and regulatory changes.

For financial institutions using reciprocal-deposit networks, the September rule means compliance procedures and deposit classifications may need to be revisited. For ordinary depositors, the more important takeaway is understanding why these networks exist in the first place: they can allow qualifying customers to spread large deposits among multiple insured banks while continuing to work primarily through one institution.

What to Read Next

FDIC Publishes 2026 Risk Review Covering Funding, Interest Rate, and Credit Risks Facing Banks

7 FDIC Coverage Rules Couples Should Recheck Before Opening Trust or Joint Accounts

How Many CDs Can You Have at One Bank? What FDIC Rules Actually Allow

Amanda Blankenship

Federal Agencies Withdraw 2022 Guidance on Special Credit Programs — What Borrowers Should Know

August 26, 2026 by Amanda Blankenship Leave a Comment

Seven federal agencies have withdrawn a 2022 policy statement that encouraged banks and other creditors to use special purpose credit programs to expand access to financing for underserved groups. The rescission took effect August 25, 2026, and affects guidance involving the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, commonly called ECOA, and its implementing rule, Regulation B.

The change does not eliminate special purpose credit programs altogether. Instead, it removes the agencies’ 2022 interagency statement and comes after a separate 2026 change to Regulation B that narrowed how certain characteristics can be used in these programs.

For consumers, particularly borrowers who have encountered down-payment assistance, mortgage programs, or other lending initiatives aimed at economically disadvantaged groups, understanding that distinction is important.

What the Seven Federal Agencies Changed

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Justice, and Federal Housing Finance Agency jointly rescinded the 2022 “Interagency Statement on Special Purpose Credit Programs Under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B.” The notice was published in the Federal Register on August 25 as Document No. 2026-17307 and became effective the same day.

The agencies said they took the action to make two points clear: creditors may not discriminate against borrowers based on prohibited characteristics, and lenders should no longer rely on the 2022 statement or related issuances. The OCC separately rescinded its 2022 bulletin that had distributed the earlier interagency guidance to banks it supervises.

Notably, the Federal Reserve participated in the original 2022 statement but is not among the seven agencies listed in the 2026 rescission.

What Are Special Purpose Credit Programs?

Special purpose credit programs, or SPCPs, are not simply a product created by the 2022 guidance. Regulation B itself continues to contain provisions allowing certain qualifying credit programs designed to meet particular needs.

These can include credit-assistance programs expressly authorized by federal or state law for economically disadvantaged groups, qualifying nonprofit programs, and certain programs offered by for-profit organizations to meet special social needs.

The 2022 interagency statement encouraged creditors to explore these programs as a way of increasing credit access for historically disadvantaged people and communities. It also sought to reassure financial institutions that were uncertain about when such programs were permissible under ECOA and Regulation B.

That encouragement has now been withdrawn.

A Separate 2026 Rule Already Changed the Ground Rules

The rescission makes more sense in the context of a significant regulatory change that occurred earlier this year.

On April 22, 2026, the CFPB finalized amendments to Regulation B covering disparate-impact liability, discouragement of applicants and special purpose credit programs. Among other changes, the updated regulation prohibits certain SPCPs from using an applicant’s race, color, national origin or sex as a common characteristic or eligibility factor.

The OCC specifically pointed to that change in explaining the August rescission, noting that the 2022 statement had referenced an earlier version of Regulation B that has since been amended.

That distinction is important because the new announcement should not be interpreted as meaning that every SPCP is now prohibited. Current Regulation B still expressly provides for qualifying special purpose credit programs, subject to the regulation’s requirements.

What This Could Mean for Borrowers

Consumers probably won’t see their existing mortgage, credit card, or other conventional loan suddenly change because of the August 25 announcement. The more immediate impact falls on lenders that operate, design or were considering special purpose credit programs.

Financial institutions now have to evaluate those programs under the current version of Regulation B without relying on the assurances contained in the 2022 interagency statement.

For borrowers, the practical effect could eventually appear in the availability, eligibility criteria, or design of certain targeted lending programs. However, the rescission notice itself does not announce that a particular bank program has been canceled or that a specific group of borrowers will lose access to credit.

Consumers enrolled in an existing program should therefore avoid assuming that the federal announcement automatically terminates their participation. Questions about an individual loan or program are best directed to the lender administering it.

Federal Fair-Lending Protections Still Apply

The withdrawal also does not eliminate ECOA’s broader protections against credit discrimination.

The CFPB’s current Regulation B resources continue to cover consumer credit, business credit, mortgages, refinancing, credit applications, servicing and other lending activities.

The seven agencies emphasized in their rescission that creditors may not discriminate against borrowers based on prohibited characteristics. In other words, this is a change in federal guidance concerning special purpose credit programs, not the repeal of federal fair-lending law.

Borrowers who encounter a change to a special lending program should pay attention to what their lender actually says has changed rather than assuming the August announcement applies identically to every program.

What Happens Next

Banks, credit unions, mortgage companies, and other creditors operating SPCPs will need to review their programs against the amended Regulation B and current federal guidance. The CFPB has also updated its ECOA examination procedures following the April regulatory changes, meaning the new framework is already reflected in federal supervisory materials.

For consumers, there is no universal action required because of the August 25 rescission. Someone currently applying through a special purpose credit program can ask the lender whether eligibility or program terms have changed and whether other assistance programs remain available.

The key takeaway is narrower than the original auto-generated release suggests: the federal government has withdrawn the 2022 guidance encouraging these programs, but special purpose credit programs themselves have not simply disappeared from federal law.

What to Read Next

IRS Proposes New Eligibility Rules for Refundable Payments From 4 Tax Credits

FTC Credit Repair Case Shows Why “Quick Fix” Credit Promises Can Cost Consumers Thousands

FDIC Publishes 2026 Risk Review Covering Funding, Interest Rate, and Credit Risks Facing Banks

Amanda Blankenship

The $100,000 Cash Problem: When Keeping Too Much Money “Safe” Creates a Different Kind of Risk

August 22, 2026 by Brandon Marcus Leave a Comment

A six-figure cash balance can feel like the financial equivalent of a fortress. The money sits there, untouched, ready for an emergency, a house purchase, a business opportunity, or simply the next expensive thing life decides to throw through the window. But once cash reaches $100,000, keeping every dollar parked in the same place can create a different kind of risk: the money may remain stable while its purchasing power and potential growth quietly slip away.

That does not mean anyone should rush out and invest every dollar in the stock market. Cash serves a valuable purpose, and plenty of people sleep better knowing they can cover a major expense without selling an investment at an inconvenient moment. The real question involves balance, because “safe” can describe what happens to the account balance while ignoring what happens to the money’s buying power, income potential, and overall role in a financial plan.

Cash Can Be Safe Without Being Completely Risk-Free

Cash has an obvious superpower: predictability. A dollar sitting in an FDIC-insured bank deposit does not suddenly become 80 cents because the stock market had a terrible Tuesday, and the owner can generally access the money without worrying about market timing. FDIC insurance generally covers eligible deposits up to $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, for each ownership category, so a $100,000 deposit at an insured bank falls below the standard insurance limit.

That protection matters, but it does not make cash immune to every problem. Inflation can reduce what those dollars can buy, especially when a savings account pays little interest, and a large balance can tempt someone to treat every dollar as equally useful simply because every dollar looks identical on a statement. A person with $100,000 in cash therefore may have excellent short-term security while still carrying a long-term financial risk that never appears as a scary red number.

The Bigger Problem May Be What the Cash Isn’t Doing

Imagine someone keeps $100,000 in a savings account because a future home purchase might require a large down payment. That decision could make perfect sense if the purchase sits close on the horizon, because market volatility could create a nasty surprise just when the money needs to come out. The same strategy becomes harder to justify when the purchase remains a vague “someday” idea and the entire balance continues sitting in cash for years.

Money has jobs, and not every job requires the same tool. Emergency savings needs accessibility, while money earmarked for a near-term purchase needs stability, but money intended for a distant financial goal may have a different job entirely. Leaving long-term money in cash can create opportunity cost because the owner gives up the possibility of earning returns from investments that carry appropriate levels of risk, and that tradeoff can become increasingly important as the years pass.

The $100,000 May Need Several Different Jobs

One of the simplest ways to rethink a large cash balance involves separating the money according to purpose rather than treating the entire pile as one giant emergency fund. A household might keep readily accessible cash for genuine emergencies, reserve additional money for a known upcoming expense, and consider different options for money that does not need to support either job. That approach turns a vague question about whether $100,000 feels “safe” into a much more useful question about what each portion needs to accomplish.

The exact amounts depend on income, expenses, upcoming purchases, job stability, debt, taxes, and personal comfort with investment risk. Someone preparing to buy a home soon should not necessarily invest money earmarked for the closing table just because the stock market has historically offered stronger long-term growth potential. Someone who has already covered near-term needs, however, may want to examine whether a large idle cash balance actually belongs in a longer-term investment strategy rather than a savings account.

Where You Park the Money Matters More Than It Seems

“Cash” does not always mean one specific financial product, and that distinction can cause confusion. A money market deposit account at an FDIC-insured bank qualifies as a bank deposit within applicable insurance limits, while a money market fund represents a mutual fund and does not receive FDIC insurance.

Brokerage accounts create another wrinkle because firms may automatically move uninvested cash into bank sweep programs or other arrangements. A bank sweep can place cash into deposits at participating FDIC-insured banks, potentially extending FDIC coverage across multiple institutions, while cash placed into a money market fund follows different rules and risks. That makes the fine print surprisingly important, especially when a statement simply labels everything as “cash” and leaves the details hiding somewhere several clicks deep.

The Goal Isn’t to Make Every Dollar Take a Gamble

The solution to excessive cash does not involve turning a savings account into a casino. A better approach starts with identifying how much money genuinely needs immediate access, how much needs protection from near-term market swings, and how much can serve longer-term goals without creating financial panic when markets fluctuate.

Someone who feels nervous about investing a large lump sum can also take a measured approach rather than making a dramatic overnight move. The important step involves matching the financial tool to the job instead of assuming that maximum cash equals maximum financial safety. Cash can protect against one kind of risk while exposing a portfolio to another, and a sensible plan acknowledges both sides of that equation.

When “Safe” Starts Costing More Than It Protects

The most important question for a $100,000 cash balance is not whether the money feels safe. It is why every dollar needs to remain cash, what could happen if the money stayed there for years, and whether another account or investment could handle some of those jobs more effectively.

A large cash balance can represent excellent financial discipline, especially when it supports a clear purpose. It becomes a problem when fear turns temporary savings into permanent parking, leaving money stuck in neutral long after its original assignment disappears. The smartest move may not involve doing something dramatic at all, but simply giving each dollar a job, checking where that dollar sits, and making sure “safe” does not quietly become another word for “standing still.”

What do you think: How much cash feels like enough, and when does a large savings balance start to feel more like a missed opportunity than financial security?

FDIC Publishes 2026 Risk Review Covering Funding, Interest Rate, and Credit Risks Facing Banks

July 27, 2026 by Amanda Blankenship Leave a Comment

FDIC 2026 Risk Review — The FDIC’s 2026 Risk Review examines the funding, interest rate, and credit risks that shaped the U.S. banking industry during 2025 while highlighting trends affecting financial institutions and consumers. Tada Images/Shutterstock

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has released its 2026 Risk Review, an annual report examining the most significant risks facing the U.S. banking industry during 2025. The report focuses on three primary areas: funding risk, interest rate risk, and credit risk, providing an overview of how changing economic conditions affected banks throughout the year. According to the FDIC, higher interest rates continued to pressure bank profitability, securities portfolios, funding costs, and liquidity, while credit quality remained an important area of focus across multiple lending sectors. The report also includes an executive summary, market analysis, and supporting reference materials such as a glossary and acronyms guide.

Credit Risks Remain a Major Focus

The FDIC’s review examines credit conditions across six major lending categories: commercial real estate, nondepository financial institution lending, business lending, consumer lending, residential real estate, and agriculture. The agency notes that credit risk remains inherent in all lending activities and can increase when borrowers experience financial stress or economic conditions weaken. The report is intended to help bankers, policymakers, analysts, and consumers better understand trends affecting the financial system and the health of FDIC-insured institutions. Previous editions of the annual Risk Review dating back to 2019 are also available through the FDIC.

Why the Report Matters

While the Risk Review is written primarily for financial professionals, its findings can affect consumers as well. Banking conditions influence everything from deposit rates and loan availability to overall financial stability, making the report a useful resource for anyone following the U.S. banking industry. Readers interested in learning more or reviewing the complete report can access the publication and supporting materials on the FDIC’s website.

What to Read Next

Keeping All Your Cash at One Bank? Here Are 5 Reasons to Reconsider

15 Sneaky Charges on Your Bank Statement That Could Signal Trouble

Before You Shred That Bank Statement, Read This

Amanda Blankenship

Who Is Truly Protecting My Assets If My Firm Goes Bankrupt Suddenly?

October 31, 2025 by Travis Campbell Leave a Comment

People tend to believe their investments remain secure because they use a well-known financial institution. What happens to the company when it faces an unexpected bankruptcy event? Many investors are unaware that their assets may not be as protected as they believe. Financial institutions need to determine their actual asset protectors when their institutions experience collapse. The process of identifying essential stakeholders and implementing protective measures will establish a sense of safety during your rest and help you stay calm in the event of unexpected events. The path between your money and a company’s bankruptcy failure needs the identification of all involved parties.

1. Custodians: The First Line of Defense

The primary safeguard for your assets in the event that your financial firm goes bankrupt is the custodian. Most investment firms use third-party custodians—separate institutions that actually hold your assets. This means the firm itself doesn’t technically own your stocks, bonds, and cash, but holds them on your behalf through a custodian. Therefore, if your firm were to collapse, your investments should remain unaffected. The custodian’s role is to keep your assets safe and separate from the firm’s own funds. This separation is a crucial part of asset protection, and it’s why you often see the name of a large custodian (like Fidelity, Charles Schwab, or Pershing) on your account statements.

Still, it’s wise to check who your custodian is. If your firm self-custodies, or if the custodian is small or less reputable, ask questions. That extra layer of protection is only as strong as the custodian itself.

2. SIPC Protection: Insurance for Brokerage Failures

When it comes to asset protection, the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) is a household name for investors in the United States. SIPC steps in if a brokerage fails and assets are missing due to fraud, theft, or other reasons. SIPC covers up to $500,000 per customer, including a $250,000 limit for cash claims. It’s important to note, though, that SIPC does not protect against losses from bad investments—just the loss of assets if your firm goes bankrupt and can’t account for your holdings.

For more information on SIPC coverage and its limitations, you can visit the SIPC’s official website. Understanding these limits is crucial to knowing how much of your portfolio is truly protected in the event of the worst-case scenario.

3. FDIC Insurance: Safeguarding Cash, Not Investments

If you hold cash in a bank account linked to your investment firm, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) may protect your funds. FDIC insurance covers up to $250,000 per depositor, per bank, for qualifying accounts. However, FDIC insurance does not extend to stocks, bonds, or mutual funds. It only protects cash held in specific types of accounts, such as checking or savings accounts at FDIC-member banks.

Many brokerage firms use “sweep” programs to move uninvested cash into FDIC-insured accounts. Make sure you know where your cash is parked. If it’s in a money market fund, FDIC protection likely doesn’t apply. If it’s in an FDIC-insured account, you gain another layer of asset protection if your firm faces bankruptcy.

4. Regulatory Oversight: SEC and FINRA

Regulatory agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) play an important role in asset protection. These organizations set strict rules about how investment firms must handle client assets. They require firms to keep client investments separate from their own operating accounts. Regular audits and compliance checks aim to identify problems before they compromise your financial security.

If a firm violates these rules, regulators can step in, freeze assets, and coordinate with custodians to return funds to clients. While this process is not always fast, it does provide a backstop against misconduct or mismanagement. You can check a firm’s regulatory history or file complaints using FINRA’s BrokerCheck tool to protect yourself further.

5. Your Vigilance: Reading the Fine Print

No system is perfect. While there are strong protections in place, you are your own best advocate. Always read your account agreements and statements closely. Know who your custodian is, and keep records of your positions. Ask your advisor or firm directly about what happens if the firm goes under. Transparency is key to understanding if your assets are truly protected in the event of sudden bankruptcy.

Don’t be afraid to ask tough questions. If something feels off, consider getting a second opinion or consulting a financial attorney. Being proactive can help you identify potential risks to your assets before they become actual threats.

How to Make Sure Your Asset Protection Is Solid

Asset protection requires more than relying on your financial institution for protection. You should identify all your custodians while verifying which accounts receive SIPC or FDIC insurance protection and understanding your investment storage methods. Keep copies of your statements and regularly check your balances. You need to spread your cash reserves across multiple financial institutions because this strategy enables you to stay protected by insurance policies.

The protection of your assets during a sudden bankruptcy of your firm requires you to maintain constant awareness of the situation. Don’t assume someone else is watching out for your entire portfolio. It’s your future at stake, so take the extra steps now to avoid headaches later.

Have you ever worried about what would happen to your assets if your investment firm were to go bankrupt? Share your thoughts or questions in the comments below!

What to Read Next…

Travis Campbell

Travis Campbell is a digital marketer/developer with over 10 years of experience and a writer for over 6 years. He holds a degree in E-commerce and likes to share life advice he’s learned over the years. Travis loves spending time on the golf course or at the gym when he’s not working.

Why Would a Bank Want You Gone?

The Difference Between No Explanation and No Notice

Your Money Doesn’t Automatically Belong to the Bank

A Closed Account Can Follow You to Another Bank

What To Do When Your Account Suddenly Closes

The Bank May Keep Its Reasons, but You Still Have Options

You May Also Like…

What Changed for Community Banks

A Bank Doesn’t Qualify Based on Size Alone

Why Regulators Say the Change Is Needed

U.S. Operations of Some Foreign Banks Are Included Too

What Does This Mean for Bank Customers?

The Rule Is Already in Effect, but Regulators Want Comments

What to Read Next

The FDIC Number Is a Benchmark, Not a Gold Star

A Savings Account Can Be Safe and Still Pay Poorly

The Gap Between 0.38% and 4% Is Hard to Ignore

Before Moving Your Money, Check the Fine Print

Your Bank May Not Volunteer a Better Deal

Make Your Savings Rate Earn Its Place

You May Also Like…

1. Regular Savings Accounts

2. Interest-Bearing Checking Accounts

3. Money Market Accounts

4. One-Month CDs

5. Three-Month CDs

6. Six-Month CDs

7. Twelve-Month CDs

The Rate Check That Could Pay for Itself

You May Also Like…

1. A “Bank Fraud Alert” Wants Immediate Action

2. Someone Says the Money Needs to “Move”

3. An Unfamiliar Transaction Gets Ignored

4. The Account Holds More Than Deposit Insurance Covers

5. A Bank’s Security Process Suddenly Feels Strange

6. A Caller Knows Just Enough to Sound Legit

7. A Bank Problem Gets More Urgent the Longer You Wait

A Profitable Banking System Still Needs Vigilant Customers

You May Also Like…

What Are Reciprocal Deposits?

The New Law Raises the Reciprocal Deposit Cap

More Banks May Qualify as “Agent Institutions”

What Does This Mean for Bank Customers?

The FDIC Is Still Accepting Comments

What to Read Next

What the Seven Federal Agencies Changed

What Are Special Purpose Credit Programs?

A Separate 2026 Rule Already Changed the Ground Rules

What This Could Mean for Borrowers

Federal Fair-Lending Protections Still Apply

What Happens Next

What to Read Next

Cash Can Be Safe Without Being Completely Risk-Free

The Bigger Problem May Be What the Cash Isn’t Doing

The $100,000 May Need Several Different Jobs

Where You Park the Money Matters More Than It Seems

The Goal Isn’t to Make Every Dollar Take a Gamble

When “Safe” Starts Costing More Than It Protects

You May Also Like…

Credit Risks Remain a Major Focus

Why the Report Matters

What to Read Next

1. Custodians: The First Line of Defense

2. SIPC Protection: Insurance for Brokerage Failures

3. FDIC Insurance: Safeguarding Cash, Not Investments

4. Regulatory Oversight: SEC and FINRA

5. Your Vigilance: Reading the Fine Print

How to Make Sure Your Asset Protection Is Solid

What to Read Next…