MIMIC: A proposal for deposit insurance reform

Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 338-349

  Wilcox, James A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85032765369     PISSN: 13581988     EISSN: 17400279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/eb025087     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Tanoue, D. (2000) Remarks to the Annual Convention of the Independent Community Bankers of America, San Antonio.
2. Tanoue, D. (2001) ‘Federal deposit insurance reform’, testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, Committee on Financial Services, US House of Representatives.
3. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (2001) ‘Keeping the promise: Recommendations for deposit insurance reform’.
4. Although most of the issues presented here also pertain to thrift institutions and to the Savings Association Insurance Fund (SAIF), which is also under the aegis of the FDIC, for simplicity, the author will refer generically to banks and to the deposit insurance reserve fund.
5. Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee (2000) ‘Statement of the Financial Regulatory Committee on proposal to increase deposit insurance coverage to $200,000', Statement No. 162.
6. Seidman, L. W. (1993) ‘Full faith and credit: The great S&L debacle and other Washington sagas’, Time Books, New York.
7. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (2001) ‘Full faith and credit: The great S&L debacle and other Washington sagas’, Time Books, New York.
8. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (2001) ‘Full faith and credit: The great S&L debacle and other Washington sagas’, Time Books, New York.
9. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (2000) ‘Federal deposit insurance reform options paper’.
10. The author presumes that the insurance coverage, de jure and de facto, is the same under both models.
11. Bartholomew, P. F. (1993) ‘Resolving the thrift crisis’, A CBO Study, Congressional Budget Office, Washington, USGPO, Appendix B.
12. Litan, R. E. (1990/91) ‘Getting out of the thrift crisis, now! ', The Brookings Review, Vol. 9, No. 1.
13. Mayer, M. (1990) ‘The greatest-ever bank robbery: The collapse of the savings and loan industry’, Charles, Scribner’s Sons, New York, pp. 152-59.
14. Evanoff, D. D. and Wall, L. D. (2001) ‘Sub-debt yield spreads as bank risk measures’, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Research Department, Working Paper Series, WP-01-03.
15. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (2000) ‘Deposit Insurance Options Paper’.
16. Lang, W. W. and Robertson, D. (2000) ‘Analysis of proposals for a minimum subordinated debt requirement’, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Economic and Policy Analysis, Working Paper 2000-4.
17. Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee (2000) ‘Deposit insurance reform options’, American Enterprise Institute, Statement Number 165.
18. Curry, T. and Shibut, L. (2000) ‘The cost of the savings and loan crisis: Truth and consequences’, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Banking Review, Vol. 13, No. 2.
19. Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee (2000) ‘The cost of the savings and loan crisis: Truth and consequences’, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Banking Review, Vol. 13, No. 2.
20. Kaufman, G. G. (2001) ‘The current status of deposit insurance in the United States and proposals for reform’, manuscript.
21. Domestic deposits are the base upon which premiums are now levied.
22. Unusual ‘ownership’ would be familiar, for example, to banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System. Member banks are required to purchase stock in their Federal Reserve Banks. While they participate in choosing the boards of directors and in other activities, they do not in practice have complete control over the Federal Reserve Banks.