JP Morgan Chase to start charging 1% fee on bank deposits starting May 1

[Ichingcarpenter]

Beginning May 1, JPMorgan Chase will begin charging certain (wealthy) depositors for the "right" to keep their money in JPMorgan Chase banks.

As noted by GovtSlaves.info, the bank sent some of its larger depositors a letter that said it would charge them a "balance sheet utilization fee" of 1 percent annually on deposits in excess of the money they require for operations. In other words, that amounts to a negative interest rate on many of those deposits.


JPMorgan Chase recently sent a letter to some of its large depositors telling them it didn’t want their stinking money anymore. Well, not in those words. The bank coined a euphemism: Beginning on May 1, it said, it will charge certain customers a “balance sheet utilization fee” of 1 percent a year on deposits in excess of the money they need for their operations. That amounts to a negative interest rate on deposits. The targeted customers—mostly other financial institutions—are already snatching their money out of the bank. Which is exactly what Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon wants. The goal is to shed $100 billion in deposits, and he’s about 20 percent of the way there so far.

Pause for a second and marvel at how strange this is. Banks have always paid interest to depositors. We’ve entered a new era of surplus in which banks—some, anyway—are deigning to accept money only if customers are willing to pay for the privilege


http://govtslaves.info/chase-to-charge-1-fee-for-deposits-beginning-may-1st/


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-23/negative-interest-rates-may-spark-existential-crisis-for-cash



Capitalism........... what a concept!


1992, a 44-year-old attorney made the following remarkable assertion: “For goodness’ sake, you can’t be a lawyer if you don’t represent banks.”

[LittleBlue]

1. And we bailed out these parasites

Now they'll start legally stealing from their depositors. Soon it will be everyone.

[jwirr]

10. Oh they started the legal stealing when the congress repealed Glass-Steagell. This is just a

follow up. I assume that this is to keep low income depositors away since their money is in and out to pay the bills.

Move your money to a credit union. They work for your community.

[LittleBlue]

11. Good point. nt

[Mosby]

2. Banks already charge small fees for depositing cash

Even if you deposit your cash in an ATM.

[Orrex]

3. Yes indeed

The fees are rolled into the interest rate, holding the rate down by a fraction of a percent but still adding up over time.

Bottom line is banks will always protect their bottom line.

[Mosby]

22. Wells Fargo and Chase just debit the account

They're not hiding it in interest rates, it's called "cash deposited fee" at WF, something else at Chase. These fees might just apply to business accounts. Last month I paid about $51 and change.

[SamKnause]

4. I pay zero in fees for depositing cash

or checks at my bank.

I pay zero in fees for withdrawing or depositing

cash or checks at my banks ATM.

I pay zero in fees for checks and that includes

checks that have carbon copy duplicates as proof of payment.

I pay zero fees for anything at my bank.

It is a very small rural area.

I have a checking account that is totally free; with one stipulation.

I must keep $100.00 in it.

There is an $8.00 fee if my account dips below $100.00.

Knock on wood, I have never had to pay that fee.

[NCTraveler]

9. You are paying it by recieving a very low apr.

You use the words "I pay zero" a lot. You aren't even close to paying zero. You are loaning some of the worlds largest institutions money and aren't getting shit back. Options for return are better almost anywhere. That is what you are paying.

[SamKnause]

12. I live on Social Security Disability Insurance.

My account rarely has more then $300.00 in it.

They are not making any money off of me.

I do understand your explanation though.

It just does not apply to me.

[NCTraveler]

15. It does apply to you and your three hundred dollars.

It applies to all of us. Do you know how many SS recipients are out there with an average of three hundred in their account. Ads up huge and not one of them is having their money held for free. What you are doing is out of need(best perceived option at the time). The services aren't free.

[Bohunk68]

20. I have the same things with my rural local bank.

No account fees at all once you are over 62. None. If they are making anything at all out of the pittance I get on SS, then good. Interest rates are below 1%. Since my payments all fall within the first 10 days of the month and wipes it all out, what they get from the 3rd to the 10th is not much. In fact, since it is Direct Deposit and 4 of my bills are due by the 5th of the month, it is even less.

[hollysmom]

5. I have a few hundred left in that bank, time for me to take it all out now.

it was a residual amount left int he checking account. you got half a percent higher interest if you had a checking account - now that I took all the other money out, time to take this out as well. I got a wonderful letter from them saying if I put my money back in their bank they will give me $200. Well, this and capital one,once I get that money out, I will be back n only credit unions and local savings and loan.

[Trillo]

6. Interesting that Chase feels it can tax the 1% with a 1% "fee",

while legislators refuse to raise the top-tier income tax another 1%.

Ironic. Particularly their choice of "1%".

Hmm, while typing this out, it occurred this may be an attempt to show how the poor people are not getting regressively fee'd to death, "See, it's happening to the richest, as well."

[ananda]

36. Oh my god, I see ... it's a backdoor income tax!

Isn't that unconstitutional or treason or something?

[NCTraveler]

7. The government should be doing this.

Taxing money, above that needed for operations and that haven't been paid out in disbursements, that is sitting idle for companies over a certain worth.

[1939]

17. There used to be something like that

Back in the late 50s, corporations were subject to a "retained earnings tax". Where my father worked, the owners didn't want to pay out dividends (they were in the 91% tax bracket) so they just left the money in the corporation. When the retained earnings tax came along, they just bought more raw materials (steel). At one time, their storage area was twice the size of their factory area. In their defense, they were paying full UAW union scale and benefits (under contract with the union).

[Cheese Sandwich]

8. Seize the Banks! nt

[closeupready]

13. LOL - "where are they gonna go?"

[Ruby the Liberal]

14. What is driving this?

Did they bump into some BASEL limits on reserves?

Anyone know?

[TreasonousBastard]

19. Read the article...

New regs (no, I'm not sure what they are-- something to do with bonds, I think) on bank cash reserves are pushing banks to reduce the amount of cash on hand and this is one way to do it. Apparently, European banks have been doing it for a while.

Japan went through this a while ago, but I don't remember how it all turned out. It looks like it all started when we dropped interest rates to spur capital investment. Of course, when they do this when there's no liquidity problem the money tends to go into the stock market until that gets full. Then it just lies there or buys huge mansions in the Hamptons because even when it's cheaper to borrow than it is to save, there has to be some business reason to spend the money and get back to building the economy.

[Ruby the Liberal]

27. Yes, reading the article works

I can access DU from work, but not Bloomberg. Go figure.

I see what they are talking about. Related to the inverse relationship between interest rates and bond yields. When one is down, the other rises. Still doesn't explain why the cash on hand is suddenly so "expensive". Its all digital. Not like JPM is having to build ginormous vaults and hire additional 24/7 security for it. I remember when they dumped Silver on the market - but that was because of the physical storage/security cost and the fact that they were stockpiling. This is something other than that.

Thanks for the response - I do remember Japan's bank crisis, but not in enough detail to recall the triggers. The Fed has had us at 0% - .25% windows for almost a decade now, and I don't hardly think JPM is looking for ways to stimulate the economy (that don't primarily benefit their shareholders).

I'll ask our Treasury guy tomorrow if he has any insight on this tactic (and if we are playing this game as well - or planning to).

[TreasonousBastard]

33. I'd appreciate hearing if your guy has any thoughts...

At first glance it looks like JPM is just getting out from under unprofitable cash.

Bonds are odd, though, and the interest rate is merely nominal-- nobody sits around waiting to cash them in but money is made, or lost, trading them. From the first day bonds are auctioned off and the fun keeps on going. How that plays into this I'm not sure.

[Ruby the Liberal]

34. I sent him an email with the bloomberg link

Will forward you a message with whatever he sends me back. The only way I could see cash as unprofitable is if the credit markets have seized up again, and nothing seems to be implying that is happening or even on the horizon. Have to say, I am genuinely stumped by this negative interest rate scheme. Theres probably a very good/logical explanation, just can't fathom what it might be.

[Ichingcarpenter]

21. A cashless society, run by the banks, controlled by the banks

and created for their profits.

[Historic NY]

16. Chase has mirerable CD rates for the bottom depositers...

maybe they will boost them.

[99Forever]

18. I stopped paying ridiculous bankster fees a couple of years ago.

At my credit union, I am one of the owners. All the services, none of the bullshit.

[lindysalsagal]

29. Me, too. Love my credit union. Never going back. Screw em. n/t.

[kentuck]

23. What it means is that they take $10-$20 per month from Social Security recipients...

that have their checks automatically deposited into their JP Morgan account. They could change banks but most will not.

[brooklynite]

28. I think this is targeted at corporate accounts, not retirees...

[PeaceNikki]

30. Did you read the linked article?

The targeted customers—mostly other financial institutions—are already snatching their money out of the bank. Which is exactly what Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon wants. The goal is to shed $100 billion in deposits, and he’s about 20 percent of the way there so far.

[Wilms]

24. Join a credit union! n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

25. The JP Morgan vision for Europe... they already own congress and parts of the executive.

The JP Morgan vision for Europe

In May 2013 the US financial giant JP Morgan released a progress report outlining their take on what they call the "Eurozone Adjustment".

The standout passage of this document can be found on page 12, where they explain what they think is wrong with Europe (quoted below). Note there is absolutely no mention of financial instability caused by countless recklessly over-leveraged financial institutions gambling on crap like Spanish property, Irish bank bonds and Greek sovereign debt, and absolutely no talk of financial sector reform either. The JP Morgan narrative adheres very closely to the Great Neoliberal Lie technique, where the real causes of the financial crisis are played down or ignored completely in favour of the misleading narrative that social welfare spending caused the crisis. Here's the section in question:

"The political systems in the periphery [of the Eurozone] were established in the aftermath of dictatorship, and were defined by that experience. Constitutions tend to show a strong socialist influence, reflecting the political strength that left wing parties gained after the defeat of fascism. Political systems around the periphery typically display several of the following features: weak executives; weak central states relative to regions; constitutional protection of labor rights; consensus building systems which foster political clientalism; and the right to protest if unwelcome changes are made to the political status quo. The shortcomings of this political legacy have been revealed by the crisis. Countries around the periphery have only been partially successful in producing fiscal and economic reform agendas, with governments constrained by constitutions (Portugal), powerful regions (Spain), and the rise of populist parties (Italy and Greece)."


So, the problems that JP Morgan have identified in Europe are strong legislatures (or "weak executives" as they put it) strong regional representation, protected labour rights, strong constitutions and political systems that rely in part upon consensus building instead of dictatorship. They also identify the rise of democratic populist parties and the public right to political protest as major impediments to their "Eurozone Adjustment" objectives.

JP Morgan make it absolutely clear that they would like to see European states remodeled with much more powerful, dictatorial and centralised executives, they want to see the destruction of labour rights and they are certainly not keen to allow populist anti-austerity parties or public protest to get in the way of this agenda.

Essentially what this document demonstrates is that JP Morgan see the decline of European fascism since the 1940s and its replacement with mixed-economy social democracies as a great disappointment, that they are determined to steer Europe back towards fascism and that they are intent on using the financial sector meltdown as an excuse to use the utterly false Great Neoliberal Lie narrative to justify this pro-fascist agenda.

The motivation for a major financial organisation like JP Morgan to promote the fascistic remodeling of Europe should be absolutely obvious. States administered by powerful centralised and dictatorial executives are far more easily influenced by corporate interests than governments constrained by strong legislatures, fair judicial systems, strong regional representation, robust organised labour and popular freedom of protest, all enshrined by a durable constitution.

To put it more simply, a state with a centralised and dictatorial government is far more malleable than a state in which the government must balance the interests of corporate interests with those of organised labour, regional interests and the public at large. If labour rights are eroded, local government weakened and the right to popular protest is curtailed, the enforcement of corporate interests becomes much easier. All the corporations need do is financially coerce (or economically straitjacket) the centralist executive branch of government in order to gain almost complete power over whole national economies.


http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.dk/2013/06/the-jp-morgan-plan-for-europe.html


Just in case you think it sounds utterly far fetched that an American financial institution may be attempting to undermine democracy and liberty in Europe in order to impose fascistic regimes more favourable to their commercial interests, just consider the history of JP Morgan themselves. Not only did JP Morgan actively invest in Nazi industry (through the automotive company Opel and other subsidiaries) well into the Second World War, they were also compensated for their losses by the American taxpayer when they were forced to divest (several other American corporations such as Standard Oil maintained their investments in Nazi Germany for several years after the US joined the war against Germany!). Chase Bank (which merged with JP Morgan in 2000) were one of Wall Street's most enthusiastic investors in the Nazi economy, even providing direct assistance to Hitler's Nazi regime in the late 1930s. Chase and JP Morgan were the only two American banks which stayed open in France during the Nazi occupation there.

JP Morgan has a proven history of collaboration with fascist regimes in Europe. If JP Morgan supported and profited from the rise of the Nazi party in Germany, and suffered no adverse financial consequences for it (even getting a US taxpayer funded tax rebate to cover their losses when they were forced to divest their Nazi assets and first dibs to reacquire their Nazi assets after the war was over), is it any surprise that they favour the imposition of an illiberal and fascistic political agenda on the states of Europe once again?

[BadgerKid]

26. Three guaranteed things in life:

Death, taxes, and banking fees.

[liberal_at_heart]

31. and yet we still have the exact same conditions in place that we had before the crash so

if the big banks fall again we get to bail them out again.

Thanks for the bank regulations White House and Congress.

[roamer65]

32. Negative interest rates finally arrive in the US.

Used to be saving was rewarded, soon it will be a crime.

[Ichingcarpenter]

35. As long as private banks control the money supply

which the do .......... we are under their mercy



"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812), founder of the House of Rothschild.

"The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests." The Rothschild brothers of London writing to associates in New York, 1863.

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of a pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this world would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain slaves of the Bankers and pay for the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits." Sir Josiah Stamp, President of the Bank of England in the 1920s, the second richest man in Britain.

"I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can and do create money. And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hand the destiny of the people." Reginald McKenna, as Chairman of the Midland Bank, addressing stockholders in 1924.

"The banks do create money. They have been doing it for a long time, but they didn't realise it, and they did not admit it. Very few did. You will find it in all sorts of documents, financial textbooks, etc. But in the intervening years, and we must be perfectly frank about these things, there has been a development of thought, until today I doubt very much whether you would get many prominent bankers to attempt to deny that banks create it." H W White, Chairman of the Associated Banks of New Zealand, to the New Zealand Monetary Commission, 1955.


"When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain." Napoleon Bonaparte, Emperor of France.

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." Thomas Jefferson in the debate over The Re-charter of the Bank Bill (1809).

"Money plays the largest part in determining the course of history." Karl Marx writing in the Communist Manifesto (1848).

"The government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers. By adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity." Abraham Lincoln, US President 1861-5. He created government issue money during the American Civil War and was assassinated.

"The death of Lincoln was a disaster for Christendom. There was no man in the United States great enough to wear his boots and the bankers went anew to grab the riches. I fear that foreign bankers with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America and use it to systematically corrupt civilisation." Otto von Bismark (1815-1898), German Chancellor, after the Lincoln assassination.