Tuesday, April 2, 2013

Canadian Government Will Confiscate Depositor Accounts

The Canadian Government Offers "Bail-In" Regime, Prepares For The Confiscation Of Bank Deposits To Bail Out Banks

Mssrs. Harper and Flaherty:

The article attached below should bring great distress to any Canadian reader. Can both of you please clarify the “bail-in” and “certain bank liabilities” terminology on page 145 of your latest Federal budget. I hope you are not secretly abetting the criminal conduct of the banking community, and allowing to happen, to Canadian depositors what has just happened to Cypriot depositors.

Global governments have sacrificed the hard-work of billions of people to enrich “bank thieves”. These same governments have allowed bank CEO’s and executive staff to earn millions of dollars in salaries and benefits to the detriment of their respective economies. Rather than secretly attempting to confiscate depositor funds with your newest budget, why do you not simply “confiscate and nationalize” all bank assets. Shareholders and bondholders should be the first creditors to sustain losses, not unwary depositors.

The degree to which politicians have allowed banking institutions to “screw” the public is “criminal”. There simply is no other word for it. The wording contained within the budget document is ominous, unclear and seditious.

As elected officials you are to uphold the rights of Canadian citizens, not banks, monarchs, thieves and murderers. A reply and clarification would be greatly appreciated.


The Canadian Government Offers "Bail-In" Regime, Prepares For The Confiscation Of Bank Deposits To Bail Out Banks

Submitted by Reggie Middleton on 03/30/2013 11:12 -0400


As part of the 2013 budget in Canada, the Minister of Finance tabled the Economic Action Plan 2013 which included the newest buzzword 'bail-in'.

Page 145 of the Federal Budget reads:

“The [Canadian] 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. This will reduce risks for taxpayers. The Government will consult stakeholders on how best to implement a bail-in regime in Canada. Implementation timelines will allow for a smooth transition for affected institutions, investors and other market participants. Systemically important banks will continue to be subject to existing risk management requirements, including enhanced supervision and recovery and resolution plans.

This risk management framework will limit the unfair advantage that could be gained by Canada’s systemically important banks through the mistaken belief by investors and other market participants that these institutions are ‘too big to fail’.”
A depositor is an unsecured creditor to a bank. The Canadian government presents its position to be one of shielding the taxpayer from the need to pay for bailing out a failing bank. As a taxpayer that is comforting.

However as a depositor, the phrase “rapid conversion of certain bank liabilities into regulatory capital” concerns me. My deposit is the bank’s liability. Could depositors’ funds fall under the definition of ‘certain bank liabilities’?  I searched the entire 442 page document and I cannot find where the term ‘certain bank liabilities’ is defined.
The prudent approach I believe would be to assume that under certain conditions, certain bank liabilities will include depositors’ funds; at least those funds in excess of CAD 100,000 which is our so-called insured amount.

Even if it has noble intentions now, under a credit and derivatives collapse scenario, it is conceivable that the Canadian government could be coerced or bullied by external agents into grabbing depositors’ funds just like what is happening in Cyprus.

Thank you,
Joseph Pede

No comments: