This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Conspicuous by its absence from the article is the FRB's rationale in enacting Regulation D. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 14:24, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just a guess, but I would expect that it was a way to prevent savings accounts from substituting for checking accounts, from the time when checking accounts could not pay interest. (Which seems like a silly concern today when interest rates are near zero, but it wasn't that long ago that savings accounts paid a respectable 3% APR or better.) Ultimately, I believe the purpose of this line of regulation was to force customers to provide more information about their time horizons to the banks, so that the bank could maintain an appropriate level of cash on hand to meet demand. But again, that's just a guess -- but there should be plenty of information in the Federal Register for anyone who cared to do the research. 121a0012 (talk) 03:07, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget the Negotiable Order of Withdrawal account (NOW) account: "a deposit account that pays interest, on which checks may be written". It's all very confusing. Fxm12 (talk) 22:11, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
the "regulatory aspects" § of the article suggest also that the fractional reserve requirement for checking accounts is greater than that for savings accounts. Banks want to keep the minimum reserve on hand; too much $ on reserve means that the cash is sitting unused, while too little $ on reserve means that the law is being violated. Therefore, banks would have a real headache maintaining the reserve at the statutory minimum if depositors moved funds back and forth between accounts. Mang (talk) 20:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Because the federal government feels that it needs to dictate EVERYTHING that we say or do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OprahtheHutt (talk • contribs) 14:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
