Australian Broker forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

'Depositors haven't suffered a bank failure since 1890's, levy unnecessary'

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 05 Aug 2013, 07:00 AM Agree 0
The ABA is fuming at Government's decision to implement a levy on bank deposits - but Treasurer Chris Bowen says the decision is well-overdue
  • Tony | 05 Aug 2013, 09:13 AM Agree 0
    Think it is fine to have the fund implemented, as long as it isn't used as Government revenue and held purely for the purpose of savings requirements in need of a an Institutions collapse !!!
  • Ray C | 05 Aug 2013, 09:20 AM Agree 0
    The ABA also put out 6 Myths about the Banks and the Credit Crisis. None of which could be argued where myths. The Banks where strongly protected during the GFC due to Government's guaranteeing of deposits so much so that some 100 Non Bank lenders departed the Mortgage market critically effecting the small investor particularly in the small business market. This effect has continued to date.It is one of the many drivers behind the two speed economy we have experienced since the GFC Support only for the Banks and big business, small business continued to be destroyed.
  • Chris C | 05 Aug 2013, 09:31 AM Agree 0
    Don't our Banks already have this and borrowers already pay an interest margin for a security levy to the RBA on Capital Adequacy (ex Statutory Reserve Deposits) Why should we have another fund just to save the Govt pockets. If they better manage the country's finances it would be more than adequate to cover. The current Govt obviously does not care how much our debt grows..... they must be laughing behind closed doors wondreing how long until the public wakes up and votes them out. Imagine it would be the same as Insurance Companies that charge premiums for risks on the day but don't provision the funds away to be there for when they are required and suddenly we are faced with price rises when we should not really need them. Congrats to this Govt for seeing an opportunity to further tax the depositors this time - will pensioners be excluded from this tax or will they receive an increase in their pension payment to cover it...then again what's the difference between 2% and 2.5%....... a few days worth of meals I suppose.
  • Sydney Broker | 05 Aug 2013, 09:34 AM Agree 0
    "Cry me a River" Steven. The banks survived because of tax payer backing and should be held to account. The biggest stuff up of all is that the government should have imposed conditions at the time. Not now. The banks are posting record profits on th eback of tax payers, have failed to pass on rate cuts to borrowers and also heavily reduced commissions to brokers. Even though it has not adversely affected them.
    Of course the consumer will end up paying for this anyway - which is the biggest problem of all. Had this been done at the time then the government would have more control now.
    Also - why is Macquarie not included in this? They benefited from the bail out and should also have to pay!
  • SIDBROKER | 05 Aug 2013, 10:25 AM Agree 0
    Perhaps Labor, Bowen, Rudd and the rest of the labor vandals seek to have an emergency fund to fall back on down the track that they can get their sticky little fingers into. I don`t know wether this is wishfull thinking, stupity to the extreme or unfounded optimisum. We have I beleive a fed. election on sept. 7 and if the current govt. wins I am going to hop on the next boat to Indonesia and apply for a visa to settle in Iran. Bowen has been in the job for 5 minutes now and already is displaying mega arrogance which historicaally the Great Australian people will not tolerate past the next election!!
  • Papery | 05 Aug 2013, 12:05 PM Agree 0
    Lets just go back to the good old days when everyone hid there money under their mattress, withdrawing from the bank as fast at a direct credit could be processed. Maybe we just need to keep up with the likes of the banking systems in say Greece, Cyprus the US...
  • Wayne | 05 Aug 2013, 05:32 PM Agree 0
    I never thought I'd be saying this but the Greens had a good idea. Only apply the tax to the Big 4, and their subsidiaries, who are considered "too big to fail". Their size affords them benefits the smaller players don't have and would go some way to levelling the playing field. Would also mean the cost would be less likely to be passed on to the consumer.
  • Larry Terrance | 05 Aug 2013, 07:08 PM Agree 0
    The State Bank of Victoria would have failed if not taken over by CBA. That was not 1890.
  • Phil in Finance | 06 Aug 2013, 12:54 PM Agree 0
    The ABA has a very convenient memory.
    The government deposit guarantee was issued just in time to save Suncorp's bacon at the height of the GFC impact (which was well known in the industry and media) and this also saved other ADT's that were then covered as well.
Post a reply