Can Bank Deposit Confiscation Happen Here?

The following is a ‘to be forewarned is to be forearmed’ commentary. Should those with bank deposits in the…European Union be concerned about the possibility of a ‘Cyprus event’ coming ‘soon to their neighbourhood’?…What about bank deposit confiscation in Canada?…[T]his is something to…consider and ‘think about’.

So writes Ian R. Campbell in his Economic Straight Talk Newsletter which is available by subscription only . The commentary below is just one item discussed in his latest daily newsletter* (see archived newsletters in their entirety here) under the heading Deposit Confiscation:  Can it happen here?.

(NOTE: This post is presented by  Lorimer Wilson, editor of www.FinancialArticleSummariesToday.com and www.munKNEE.com and the free Intelligence Report newsletter (see sample here – register here). The article may have been edited ([ ]), abridged (…) and/or reformatted (some sub-titles and bold/italics emphases) for the sake of clarity and brevity to ensure a fast and easy read.

Submit your own articles & article suggestions here (earn a “Hat Tip” acknowledgement) for posting consideration. “Follow the munKNEE” daily posts via Twitter or Facebook. These paragraphs must be included in any article re-posting to avoid copyright infringement.)

Campbell goes on to say in edited excerpts from his newsletter:

In past weeks a number of bloggers and commentators have picked up on language found in a November 2011 G20 Policy Statement headed Policy Measures to Address Systemically Important Financial Institutions, and in March in the Canadian Federal Government’s Economic Action Plan for 2013, that states (at page 145):

The Government proposes to implement a bail-in regime for systemically important banks. This regime will be designed to ensure that, in the unlikely event that a systemically important bank depletes its capital, the bank can be recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of certain bank liabilities into regulatory capital.

As you may know, this statement created what has been described as ‘a tremor’ in the Canadian fixed income community.  As a result, a (Toronto) Globe and Mail article on April 2 titled Ottawa clears up confusion over bank ‘bail-in’ carried a story in which the Canadian Finance Minister’s Press Secretary was quoted as saying:

“The bail-in scenario described in the Budget has nothing to do with depositor’s accounts and they will in no way be used here. Those accounts will continue to remain insured through The Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation”.

Interesting, and fine as far as it goes, until one focuses on the fact that The Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation insures deposits at individual banks only to the extent of $100,000.  Smacks a little of Cyprus, or at least enough that I decided to follow up.  In summary, the best information I have been able to glean to date is that:

• money deposited or ‘invested’ in any form of savings account that is held by a Canadian bank or Canadian bank subsidiary (including its ‘financial markets’ arm(s)) is a ‘bank deposit’.  Hence the depositor of any money in such an account is an ‘unsecured creditor’ of the bank; and,

• money ‘invested’ in any Canadian bank or Canadian bank subsidiary account that in turn is invested by the bank on behalf of the depositor in securities – including short term treasury bills or other short-term financial instruments – is deemed to be an amount held on behalf of the investor in circumstances where the investor is the owner of those securities.

Accordingly, in Canada and irrespective of the statement made on April 1 by the Canadian Finance Minister’s Press Secretary, if the foregoing is correct, in theory any amount in excess of $100,000 held in any Canadian bank in any form of savings account could be subject to ‘bail-in’ confiscation.
Two clear qualifications with respect to the foregoing:

• I have not researched the question of what is a ‘deposit’ in any country other than Canada, which countries each will have their own different laws and interpretations; and,

• the foregoing should not be taken by any reader to be either legal or investment advice.  Rather, it is provided to readers in an attempt to better enable them to speak with their own legal counsel and investment advisors with respect to any monies they hold on deposit with their bank(s) in the form of cash or ‘near cash’ if a reader elects to do that.

…[T]he European Council has just put forward a proposal that would see uninsured deposits over 100,000 euros be ‘bailed in’ in the event of future European bank collapses.  Under this proposal depositors would rank above other creditors in the even of a bank wind-down – with this ‘ranking’ to be known as ‘deposit preference’.

[As I mentioned at the outset], this a ‘to be forewarned is to be forearmed’ commentary…[S]peak with your legal and investment advisors if you have concerns and questions around bank and investment bank deposit issues.

Topical References:

• It Can Happen Here: The Confiscation Scheme Planned for US and UK Depositors, from Resilience, Ellen Brown, March 30, 2013 – reading time 4 minutes.  Also see:
• It’s Not Just Reggie Warning Irishmen Anymore As Irish Presidency of the European Council Says Capital At Risk, from BoomBustBlog, Reggie Middleton, May 7, 2013 – reading time 3 minutes;
• Ottawa clears up confusion over bank ‘bail-in’, from The Globe and Mail, Grant Robertson, April 2, 2013 – reading time 3 minutes;
• Ottawa’s bank ‘bail-in’ talk spooks investors, from The Financial Post, John Greenwood, April 3, 2013 – reading time 2 minutes;
• Bomb from Brussels: Cyprus Model May Guide Future Bank Bailouts, from Spiegel Online, Martin Hesse and others, April 1, 2013 – reading time 5 minutes;
• Danger in bank accounts, from Resource Investor, Alasdair MacLeod, April 2, 2013 – reading time 4 minutes; and,
• Policy Measures to Address Systemically Important Financial Institutions, Financial Stability Board, from BarnabyisRight.com, November 4, 2012 – reading time 1 minute.

(Editor’s Note: The author’s views and conclusions in the above article are unaltered and no personal comments have been included to maintain the integrity of the original post. Furthermore, the views, conclusions and any recommendations offered in this article are not to be construed as an endorsement of such by the editor.)

*The Economic Straight Talk Newsletter (Insights for Serious Traders and Investors – Today’s Commentary on Economic & Resource News) by Ian R. Campbell, FCA, FCBV; © 2013, Stock Research DD Inc., all rights reserved.

Related Articles:

1. Do You Actually Own “Your” Gold Given What’s Happened in Cyprus & Proposed In Canada/E.U.?

To believe that governments…[won’t confiscate your] gold to help support their national finances… would be naïve, especially in light of past and recent events. That’s why it is now incumbent on all investors to look at the meaning of ownership in investing and investors’ vulnerability to government confiscation as well as vulnerability to exchange and capital controls. We do this below. Read More »

2. Cyprus is a Trial Balloon for the NWO – Buy Gold to Protect Yourself

Cyprus is a trial balloon for the NWO [New World Order], taking a small country that can more easily be controlled, putting the financial screws to bank depositors and then watching how it all unfolds, creating a playbook for future bank raids… If anyone thinks this [was] a one-time, knee-jerk response, the Bank of Cyprus is offering a free toaster for new deposits as a reminder that your money will be toast.