Jim Cramer says bank protection via FDIC is unreliable
Jim Cramer, the Mad Money host on CBNC, has given his opinion on insuring and protecting banks as the federal government intervenes in the recent major bank crashes.
Cramer encouraged holders to withdraw from the recent failing banks such as Silicon Valley Bank despite the news that the bank’s expanded insurance program protects account holders.
Jim Cramer’s sentiments on FDIC insuring fallen banks
The TV host claims no bank should hold more than 10% of a nation’s deposits if the maximum bank insurance is $250,000, except for the most established and well-regulated bank.
Cramer claims that not all banks are insured equally because the insurance coverage varies depending on the bank’s size, the best deposit base, and how well-regulated the bank is. He further argues that compensation for fairly sized banks is only achievable if the insurance covers all the deposits at an infinite amount.
In the show, Cramer calls for the protection of all banks and not the current fixation on JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America. He argues that it is impossible to protect banks with highly concentrated deposit bases when the major depositors flee.
Government intervention in Signature Bank and SVB’s assets
Cramer’s views come a day after the U.S. president, Joe Biden, assured everyone holding accounts at the failing banks that they can access their money as of March 13, 2023.
The bank holders included small businesses that needed the funds to stay afloat. Biden said that the FDIC would source the funds from the Deposit Insurance Fund fees, and no taxpayer would bear any losses.
Biden further said that the management of the failed banks would be fired as the federal deposit insurance corporation (FDIC) took charge of the establishments. However, the FDIC will not compensate the investors in the banks as they took risks, and losses are just one of the ways investments end.
Is the reverse Cramer technique applicable?
Jim Cramer has made a name for himself as a stock advisor. However, with experience, the “reverse Cramer” is used by investors who oppose his recommendations.
Industry experts believe FDIC coverage is enough to compensate account holders when things go bad at a bank. Farnoosh Torabi, a financial expert, said in an exclusive interview that it takes a lot of work for banks to go out of business despite the trending news.
Social media might have fueled the flames, but intervention from the government and other institutions protected the account holders in this situation.
FDIC-insured banks will always have a guarantee on their depositors with a maximum of $250,000 in funds for every account held.
In extreme scenarios like the Signature Bank and Silicon Valley bank saga, the FDIC is able to go higher than the set limit. However, the corporation cannot insure high-risk investments such as cryptos, bonds, and stocks.
In recent developments, the treasury department announced that they would safeguard all deposits at SVB, including the funds not usually covered by federal deposit insurance. In addition, the Fed is developing a lending program meant to cushion financial institutions affected by SVB’s failure.
