Referendum on the report of the Special Federal Reserve Committee

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 1827879114

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-221388

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: Referendum on the report of the Special Federal Reserve Committee

Place of publication:: [Erscheinungsort nicht ermittelbar]

Publisher:: [Verlag nicht ermittelbar]

Year of publication:: 1930

Scope:: 53 S.; graph. Darst.

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

4 Reductions Opposed Minor Ad- justments Legislative Review Cash in Vault Rural Banks ‘tems Due From Other Banks Country Banks Reserve Required of Country Banks COMMITTEE REPORT of other banks whose lending powers would be similarly increased. Attention has already been directed to the fact that reserve percent- ages are now much less than they were prior to the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act. Just as the Committee has been opposed to general reductions in the reserves required of member banks when such reductions were proposed solely for the purpose of lowering the lending powers of reserve banks, so, too, it is opposed to such zeneral reductions when they are suggested solely for the purpose of ncreasing the lending powers of member banks. This is not to main- ‘ain that we are opposed to any change in the reserves required of nember banks. We favor some early minor adjustments as indicated >elow and support a thorough legislative review of the whole sub- lect. There is room for minor adjustments in the existing reserve re- juirements if made for the sole purpose of removing existing in- equalities in the schedules applying to the various classes of banks. One such apparent discrepancy is due to the fact that banks in rural sections are now obliged to carry in till relatively larger amounts of cash than banks in reserve and central reserve cities. Inasmuch as this cash in vault does not now count as reserve money, the coun- try banks are obliged to keep larger actual percentages of reserve than the nominal requirements of the law. It seems only just, there- fore, that member banks, in computing the deposits against which reserves must be carried, be permitted to deduct cash in vault from net demand deposits. This would result in no serious expansion of the lending powers of member banks such as would be occasioned by a proposal sometimes advanced, namely, that cash in vault should be counted as legal reserve—a proposal we do not support. There is another respect also in which country banks now feel that they are discriminated against. No bank may now utilize items due on demand from other banks to accomplish anything more than ‘0 offset amounts due to other banks. Banks which have an excess of ‘due from” items over “due to” items, can under present law receive 10 credit for the excess. This difference in the financial practices of country and of city banks has persisted to a greater extent than an- icipated when the present reserve requirements were established. On this account it is recommended that banks be permitted to deduct tems “due on demand from other banks” from gross demand de- posits instead of merely from amounts due other banks. There is on the other hand one respect in which country banks 10ld a present advantage over reserve city and central reserve city banks. Banks which hold an excess of items due on demand to other >anks over items due from other banks must observe the reserve per- “entage applying to their particular classification. On this account (Continued on page 36)

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Referendum on the report of the Special Federal Reserve Committee

Monograph

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation