Recent Blog Posts
-
The Year in Research
Dec 31 20089:13 am EDT -
Mind Your Value Judgements
Dec 19 20087:52 pm EDT -
S.E.C. Short-Sale Ban: Pretty Much Useless
Dec 19 20083:45 pm EDT -
Advice from Japan: Don't Forget TARP 1
Dec 19 20082:31 pm EDT -
Chart of the Day: Money Market Stress Easing
Dec 18 20088:57 pm EDT
Links
- Junk Charts

- Economic Principals

- New York Federal Reserve Research

- Sabernomics

- Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

- Sabermetric Research

- St. Louis Fed Research

- Bluematter

- NBER Working Papers

- TierneyLab

- Numbers Guy

- Social Science Statistics Blog

- DataPoints: The Dismal Scientist Blog

- Institute for the Study of Labor

- Predictably/Irrational

- Decision Science News

- Research Recap

- Econbrowser

- Center for Economic Policy Research

- Economist's View

- B.I.S. Working Papers

- Geary Behaviour Centre

- Real Time Economics

- Federal Reserve Working Papers

- C.B.O. Director's Blog

- Curious Capitalist

- VoxEU

- Freakonomics

- Philadelphia Fed Research

- O.E.C.D. Factblog

- MoneyScience

- Journal of Interest

- STATS Blog

- Email me

- EconTalk

- EconPapers

- Marginal Revolution

- Tim Harford

- Jeff Frankel

- Institute for the Study of Labor

- Social Science Research Network

More on FDIC Debt Guarantees
In discussing the recent federal funds oddities, there was some discussion of when the FDIC would start to charge banks for insuring fed funds transactions.
It turns out that the effective date is no longer Nov. 13, but Dec. 5. Via Wrightson-ICAP:
The FDIC has extended the free coverage period for overnight maturities for an extra three weeks while it decides how best to handle guarantees in that sector. We don't think any final decisions have been made
There are three things the FDIC could conceivably do: 1) scrap the fee altogether 2) lower it 3) keep it the same. Most market participants would probably prefer the first two, and the fact that the FDIC pushed back the date hints they might be leaning in that direction as well. The main issue is that assessing a fee on fed funds transactions (for those institutions that opt to stay in the FDICs temporary program), counteracts the benefits of paying interest on excess reserves.
And now a correction: In the comments to a previous post I said that the FDIC fee on fed funds would be charged to the issuer. That is not the case, the fee -- if the FDIC does not scrap it -- will be assessed on the purchaser.
Speaking of fed funds, the effective rate has crept higher over the last two sessions though is still far below the one percent target rate, and this situation will likely continue as the Libor continues its descent.






