Banking

Why we should all move our money to indigenous banks.  I was interested to read recently about the grassroots movement that is spreading across the USA to abandon the major banks and for all customers to move their accounts to community banks.  In our islands that would translate to “indigenous” banks. 

Here is the video that started what I expect will, in the coming months, be a groundswell of change in banking practices around the world:

It is not just the conviction that many of us have that our small indigenous banks are safer than the major international banks.  There are small people with immediate, personal reasons for moving.  Here, as an example, is Stephanie Frost, one irate Bank of America customer, explaining what she is doing:

To cite Camden R Fine, our community or indigenous banks take time to get to know their customers. They make loans to the small businesses in the community that the larger banks won’t touch.  Their continued success depends on building and maintaining good relationships with their customers.  Indigenous bankers are accountable.  They have to be.  Often they are dealing with their neighbours, the parents of their children’s friends, the people they see every day during their personal and professional lives.  They rely on common-sense practices, honesty, integrity, accountability and transparency. 

The same cannot be said of the management of the Banks of America, Citigroups, Wells Fargos, et al.

Mergers

We still have not been told why the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank is suggesting that the National Bank of Anguilla needs to merge with the Caribbean Commercial Bank.  In frustration at the lack of published information I have been doing a little digging.  Someone suggested I have a look at C Hoare & Co.  Hoare’s, like the National Bank, is a small bank.  Neither deals in derivatives.  Both provide private banking, financial planning and investment services that include loans, mortgages, savings accounts and investment advisory services. 

Hoare’s 2008/2009 accounts have been published.  So have NBA's accounts.  Hoare’s has just ₤1 billion in assets.  NBA has just EC$1 billion in assets.  The international recession started in December 2007, and hit both banks simultaneously.  Hoare’s profits show a decrease from 2007 to 2008.  Profits went down from ₤17 million the previous year to ₤15 million.  NBA’s went down from EC$19 million to EC$17 million.  The ratio of fall in profits is astonishingly similar.

Hoare’s was founded in 1672, some 20 years before the Bank of England (founded 1694).  Hoare’s is the oldest private bank in the UK.  It is considered a very successful bank.  Yet, it is tiny by comparison with other British banks.  It has survived one financial crisis after another, while the banking behemoths around the world were failing. 

It does not matter how small a local bank is.  All that matters is how carefully it is managed.  If it is not carefully managed it does not matter how big it is, it will still fail.

So long as any small local bank is taking two-thirds of the profits each year and putting them into reserves, it will do well.

This assumes that it is not making too many dodgy loans.

Related posts:

Amalgamation

Phishing

The email was so realistic, with the cute little logo and all.  It invited me to click on a link to update my information “as part of our continuous effort in protecting your account.  I have seen dozens of these over the past several years.  I can only hope that no customer of National Bank of Anguilla is taken in by the scam.  It helped that the usual mis-typings and mis-spellings expected of these scams were present.  I immediately forwarded a copy of the email to Val, Roy and Ian at NBA suggesting they get an urgent notice to the police and the public using all media.

Dear Valued Customer, It has come to our attention that your NBA Online profile needs to be updated as part of our continuous effort in protecting your account  and reducing instances of fraud on our website. This is being done to secure your accounts and to protect your personal informations from being compromised.We at National Bank of Anguilla Online are committed in making sure that your online transactions are secure. Click on the link below to start the verification process and re-confirm your account https://www.nba-online/_mem_bin/formslogin.asp Once your information has been updated and confirmed your online service would continue as usual and would not be interrupted Sincerely, National Bank of Anguilla Customer Service

Wikipedia explains that in the field of computer security, phishing is the criminally fraudulent process of attempting to acquire sensitive information such as usernames, passwords and credit card details by masquerading as a trustworthy entity in an electronic communication.  Communications purporting to be from popular social web sites, auction sites, online payment processors or IT administrators are commonly used to lure the unsuspecting public.  Phishing is typically carried out by e-mail or instant messaging, and it often directs users to enter details at a fake website whose look and feel are almost identical to the legitimate one. Even when using server authentication, it may require tremendous skill to detect that the website is fake.  Phishing is an example of social engineering techniques used to fool users, and exploits the poor usability of current web security technologies.  Attempts to deal with the growing number of reported phishing incidents include legislation, user training, public awareness, and technical security measures.

A phishing technique was described in detail in 1987, and the first recorded use of the term "phishing" was made in 1996. The term is a variant of fishing, probably influenced by phreaking or password harvesting fishing, and alludes to baits used to "catch" financial information and passwords.

The main thing we have all been taught is DON’T CLICK ON THE LINK.  If you check out the ACTUAL address for the link you will find it takes you to a site that looks exactly like NBA but it is actually http://thomaspaulpillow.com/main.html.  Once you sign onto your account, they have your logon info.  If you already signed on, better check with the bank or put a hold on your account.

Hopefully, no one in Anguilla who received this, and I am sure I am not the only one, was tricked.

Amalgamation

National Bank of Anguilla and Caribbean Commercial Bank are being forced to merge together.  Yes, I want to come back to this topic.  The Chief Minister, and Chairman of the Board of the Caribbean Commercial Bank, has told us at one of his press conferences that the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank is demanding amalgamation.  I want to focus on that aspect of the issue.  The Central Bank is the regulator of the two banks.  The banks are helpless to resist the pressure coming from such a quarter, regardless of how mindless it is.  Refusal appears to be out of the question.  The two banks are apparently working to put the plan into effect without further delay.

In order to have an idea of what a merger would mean in financial terms, I searched the internet for financial data on the two banks.  NBA was not difficult to find.  The 2008 Report and Accounts are on the NBA website.  The balance sheet at page 23 reveals that the total assets of that bank at the time were EC$1.13 billion, deposits were EC$928 million, and shareholders equity amounted to EC$131 million.  I searched for any Annual Report for CCB to see how much they would bring to the marriage.  I found their website easily enough.  There is no financial information on it that I could locate.  I know that as a private bank they are not obliged to make their balance sheets publicly available.  I realise that the data is not secret.  It is given to the Central Bank on at least a quarterly basis.  It is also published in the Official Gazette.  However, neither of these sources is online, and CCB’s financial data is therefore essentially unavailable.

We cannot imagine that the figures for CCB can be any greater than those for NBA.  Even if CCB brought in the region of EC$1 billion to the table, we are still talking of total assets and liabilities of the merged entities of about EC$2 billion.  US$100 equals EC$270.  That means that the merged assets will be in the region of US$571 million.

Apparently, the Central Bank has convinced itself that the two local banks are too small to stand on their own.  The argument being advanced is probably that the two will become stronger and better able to resist the present economic downturn if they amalgamate.  That just does not make sense.  In international banking terms, both local institutions are tiny.  Why would any regulator be so deluded as to believe that two minnows coming together will be anything else but one minnow with indigestion?

A search of the internet for bank failures in the USA during 2009 is revealing.  Of the 10 largest bank failures, the deposits of Colonial Bank exceeded US$20 billion.  The smallest, New Frontier Bank, had deposits in excess of US$2 billion.  The complete list, for those interested, can be checked here.  Our two banks are miniscule in comparison to these US banking failures.  What conceivable safety could their amalgamation provide when much larger US and UK banks are much more likely to fail than ours are?

 Heaven alone knows what arguments the ECCB has produced to justify such a dangerous and destructive move.  Based on what the Chief Minister said publicly a few days ago, the principle argument appears to be that amalgamation will make it easier for our two banks merged into one to compete!  Could it be that all it really amounts to is making life easier for the Central Bank?  It gives them one less entity to regulate.

As a shareholder in NBA, I have been provided with no information as to why this dismal step is being even considered.  That distresses me.  It makes me feel sad and dispirited.  It discourages me.  It fills me with foreboding.

What is more upsetting is that the plan to amalgamate is being put into effect in secret, by order of the directors, and without consulting the shareholders.  Are we the shareholders and depositors not to be told anything until it is a fait accomplis?

Amalgamation for commercial reasons is one thing.  Amalgamation at the whim of a regulator is entirely another.

The other result of amalgamation will be that, when the economy rebounds in a few years' time, we the consumers of banking services will no longer have our two most efficient banking service providers competing with each other to our benefit.  We shall be left with expensive, inefficient, unfriendly banking services.

Related Posts:

Banking

 

Banking

I heard a lie on the Chief Minister’s press conference today.  He said that the only way our two local banks can compete on the regional scene is if they amalgamate.  The local banks he was talking about are the National Bank of Anguilla and the Caribbean Commercial Bank.  The suggestion from the Hon Chief Minister (and, by the way, active Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Caribbean Commercial Bank) was that there is a need for the NBA and the CCB to come together.  We should get rid of the NBA and CCB as separate entities.  Somehow, this coming together of these two sprats will make them big mackerels and more capable of resisting the present financial crisis. 

In my opinion, there is nothing that is further from the truth.  Would our two small fry together be bigger than the American giants that failed and went bankrupt this year?  Absolutely not!  Size is no guarantee.  Competition and carefulness wins out every day.  The integrity and caution of the Boards in dealing with all the wonderful-sounding applications coming forward from the loans committees was what counted.  I want to know, what is the Chief Minister/Chairman of the Board hiding from us ignorant little people?

What we know for certain is that the CCB and the NBA working separately over the past 25 years have done wonders for the Anguillian people.  Competition has been good for the Anguillian consumer.  We have done well having these two banks competing with each other.  The consumers have been the ones to benefit.  That is you and me.  The two banks themselves have stayed lean and mean.  That was good for their shareholders.

Have you travelled by air recently?  Since Stanford’s airline went under and was bought by LIAT?  Service by the remaining monopoly provider sucks.  Prices have risen astronomically, and service has dropped precipitately.  There is no doubt that the absence of competition in the local airline service has been hard on the consumer, that is, you and me.  It will always be the same whatever the service industry.

God help us all in Anguilla if NBA and CCB should amalgamate.  The consumer, ie, you and me, will be the victim.  We will be at the mercy of avaricious, dangerous monopoly.  The shareholders of the strong will buy out the losses of the weak.  Naught times one always equals naught.

I kid you not!

Is the truth that one of the two local banks made too many bad loans?  Is one of them about to go under?  Well, so be it.  What is left after the bankruptcy will have to be bought out by someone.  Fire the Chairman and the Board of Directors of the bankrupt company.  But, no amalgamation between a failed bank and a successful one should be allowed while pretending it is a joining of equals, please.  Just my opinion.

Banking

I always thought my correspondence with my bank was supposed to be private. Someone in St Kitts has just sent me the most extraordinary bit of correspondence. It showed that some of our banks are not very sophisticated or cautious how they deal with their customers’ confidential correspondence. My correspondent had sent the Caribbean Commercial Bank an enquiry about banking procedures in Anguilla. He had got an automatic response from the CCB computer. He was upset, and he told me why.

I decided to contact CCB myself. I went to their contact page. I filled out their enquiry form. I asked them to send me the requirements to open a bank account. Sure enough, I got an email similar to the one my correspondent had got. This is what it said:

From: <idmitch@anguillanet.com>

To: <twoodley@ccb.ai>

Cc: <masonc@masonc.com>; <idmitch@anguillanet.com>

Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 4:57 PM

Subject: Contact Us

Name: Don Mitchell

Email: idmitch@anguillanet.com

Phone Number: 497 2139

Comments: Please let me know the requirements for opening a bank account.

So, what’s special, you ask? Well, if you look carefully, you will see that, besides Trevor Woodley, the bank computer’s automatic response has been copied to Chris Mason. Now, I know Chris Mason. He is a perfectly respectable project manager. One of my last meetings with him was when he was managing Altamer Hotel’s new project to expand into the West End. Altamer wanted me to do part of an Environmental Impact Assessment for them. Their expansion project involved negotiations with cousins of mine. I considered that would raise a conflict of interest for me. Anyway, what expertise do I have to prepare any part of an EIA? I decided to tell them I was not available to do it.

But, what in the world does Chris Mason have to do with having copies of confidential banking correspondence sent to him by a bank? Why would a bank set up its enquiry page so that every piece of correspondence sent to it is automatically copied to someone who has nothing to do with the correspondence of the bank’s customers?

Is this in compliance with CCB’s confidentiality obligations?

Now, I do all my banking at the National Bank of Anguilla. Does NBA make the same mistake, I wondered?

So, I went to the NBA website. I found their contact page. I checked it thoroughly. I was relieved to find that it did not have a form that would automatically get sent to anyone outside the bank. It seems that with NBA you have to personally email or telephone an individual at the bank with your enquiry. What a relief!

I would urge the CCB Board to have their website tightened up. I do not think that customers, or potential customers, for that matter, should have their confidential queries sent to any person, no matter how respectable, outside of the bank.

Now, having made the enquiry, I’m wondering if the bank is going to efficiently respond to it.

Apartments

New Apartments Approved by Planning During 2008. Someone thought I would be interested in seeing the published lists of the planning applications approved by the Land Development Control Committee for January-August 2008. That is only two-thirds of the year, not the whole year. The Committee has not published the lists for the remaining months of the year 2008. Why might the lists be of interest, I enquired. The reply was: because they indicate the volume of persons who intended, during the first part of 2008, to invest in building rental apartments. These were the brave souls taking up the challenge to invest in Anguilla’s construction boom. This boom has lasted all of this decade. Government ministers went on radio and in the House of Assembly to encourage this investment in rental apartments. It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Some of the applicants may never have gone ahead with their project. They may have applied for planning permission, got permission, and, for one reason or the other, not proceeded with the construction of their apartments. Some of the approved apartments may not have been intended for rental: they may be additions to private homes intended for friends and family to occupy while visiting. The vast majority, we can be sure, were intended to be rental apartments.

I have counted the names on the lists. I include those who were deferred or refused. There are good reasons for this. As we all know, when Planning does not immediately approve your application, the law permits the applicant to appeal to the Ministers. They, if they are favourably inclined to you, which they can be expected usually to be if you have a vote, may overturn the decision of Planning.

I make it 102 separate applications to construct apartments. That is a lot of people investing in rental apartments. That is 100 out of a total of only about 4,000 adults in our population. And these relate only to the first eight months of 2008. There may be another 50 by the end of the year, unless new applications have begun to dry up. And, who knows how many were approved in the preceeding years?

The list shows the large number of persons who have probably gone to their bank and borrowed the huge amounts of US dollars needed to build and furnish rental apartment buildings. This might have seemed at the time to be good business for the banks. But certainly, during the economic depression that is now upon us, it will not have been such a good idea for some of those of us who had to do the borrowing.

I am sure you remember that just a few months ago people were desperate for a place to live. People were advertising their need for an apartment to rent. Since then, major hotel construction projects have gone on hold due to lack of financing. There will be no more highly-paid workers to occupy new apartments coming on stream. This week there are 7 ads in the paper for residential rentals. Last week there were 8. Rental income for existing apartments will be drying up for the next year or two.

And, the owners of “Flavors Restaurant’ just converted it to flats. Bad timing . . .

If you drive around the island, and look off the main road, it is unbelievable the number of apartments you see. Many, many of them are sitting vacant.

Financial woe lies ahead for some of us. I hope and expect that things will work out in the long run. Once the banks are thoughtful, and do not act too hastily when some of these apartment loans run into arrears.

It is, of course, an outrage that we are not told about these applications in time for us to comment on them if we wish to do so, and that it takes until December for us to learn what the LDCC did in August on our behalf.

Armageddon

The EU Savings Tax Directive. I am out of the international financial services business now. I sold the company management part of my law practice in 1998. So, I am really out of touch. But, a recent gloating post by a ‘tax em or hang em’ guru about the coming Armageddon for Anguilla and other BOT financial services centres got under my skin. When that happens, I am compelled by a personal character weakness that I have previously admitted to to say something.

If you want to live in a jurisdiction where you are molly coddled from the cradle to the grave, live in the UK or another European jurisdiction. And, pay the high taxes that go with the safety nets. If you enjoy the freedom of living in one of our frontier societies, such as Anguilla is, are willing to put up with the lack of social services, but bank your total pay package at the end of the month with no deductions, then you live in an offshore financial jurisdiction, such as Anguilla is. You probably make your living providing corporate and other structures for international financial planners who service clients with international business who are taxed in high-tax jurisdictions. In Anguilla, we lead a tax-free life, in a hurricane-prone environment. We do have 5% deducted from our Anguillian salaries for social security payments, but the benefits are so ludicrously small as to be insignificant.

So, back in 1999 when the Europeans dreamed up the EU Savings Taxation Directive, we were not too concerned. Its main purpose was to allow the tax authorities in EU Member States and associated territories to share information about interest payments made to individuals. This was to help ensure savers and investors paid the right amount of tax on their savings income and to counter cross-border tax evasion within the EU. It only applied to individuals, not to trusts and other ‘offshore structures’.

The Directive set up two systems. One was an “information exchange” regime, whereby all participating countries agreed to report interest on savings paid to citizens of other EU Member States to those States’ tax authorities. The other was a “withholding tax” regime, whereby the identity of the recipient of interest is not reported, but a small tax (15%) is paid in the offshore centre and the balance remitted to the EU Members State in a lump sum so that the tax authorities are not informed of the individuals who paid. Countries with a tradition of banking secrecy, eg, Austria, Luxembourg, Belgium, and Switzerland, chose the withholding system. So did the Netherlands Antilles and the BVI. Anguilla and the Cayman Islands opted for the exchange of information regime.

Over the years, negotiations between the offshore tax jurisdictions resulted in an agreeable compromise whereby only interest income earned from certain savings and bonds came within the scope of the Directive. Most income remained safely sheltered so long as you used a jurisdiction like Anguilla. As Charles Hermann of KPMG in Switzerland explains, the Directive was so full of holes that investors simply readjusted their holdings to continue to legally avoid taxation. Furthermore, the Directive had the opposite of the desired effect of bringing investors’ money ‘back home’. Some of the most fearful investors simply placed their money far offshore in safe jurisdictions such as Singapore and Hong Kong.

Now, on 13 November 2008, the EU dropped a bombshell. They have amended the Savings Tax Directive. The intention is to close existing loopholes and better prevent tax evasion. The previous Directive only applied to payments to individuals. Anybody who transferred the money they held on deposit into either a company or a trust immediately avoided the disclosure or tax obligation. Some Swiss banks were bulk buying up to 10,000 BVI and Panamanian companies at a time. Interest payments which are channeled through previously tax-exempted structures will now be caught in the net. Companies, IBCs, corporations, limited liability partnerships, foundations, trusts and the like will all come within the scope of the Directive. Innovative financial products, even life insurance, will not escape.

The impact on West Indian offshore centres, including Anguilla, may well be radical. Local banks will be obliged to look through the company, foundation or trust that is recorded as the legal owner of the account to which the interest is paid and treat the interest as having been paid to the beneficial owner of the organization. They will be obliged to use the information held on their files for anti-money-laundering purposes to identify the real human person who benefits from the structures created in the tax haven location. The ‘reform’ is no doubt intended to kill a substantial part of Anguilla’s international banking business.

The other side of the coin is that the high-tax countries who have created this bomb-shell will not gain one penny extra in tax revenue. What is more likely to happen is that, if they implement the Amended Directive as indicated, the investments presently held in Anguilla and the BVI will soon be heading to Hong Kong and Singapore. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

NBA

National Bank of Anguilla. The only bank I bank with is NBA. NBA is my bank. So, whatever I write that might appear critical is to be taken as but a child reproaching a parent.

I have been following a story recently. The story is officially about banking secrecy. More importantly, it is about the competence and reliability of West Indian banks. The part of the story that interests me is about NBA. The author claims that he had emailed various West Indian banks with the following question:

“Dear bank rep,

I have some questions about banking secrecy at your bank. I hope you’ll be glad to answer them. Here they are:

Under what conditions will the bank share information on its clients?

Does there have to be a government investigation underway? Does that matter?

If so, who can conduct this investigation?

Does it take a court order? Is an official request good enough?

Thanks and I hope you’ll answer my questions as best you can.”

He says that only two of the several banks in the West Indies that he wrote, particularly Griffon Bank of Dominica and Caye Bank of Belize, replied. National Bank of Anguilla, among others, did not respond. He writes:

“The rest of the Banks I contacted have not answered because, as everyone knows, it’s very hard to answer an e-mail if you’re only given one week. Or maybe they’re just lazy or don’t know how to type and click buttons, or they’re just not very service oriented or non-client friendly …or the benefit of the doubt: they’re so used to keeping their mouths shut that they did not answer my e-mails.”

I do not mind that he is talking about Grenadian or Antiguan banks. I do mind that he is talking about my bank.

The answers to his question were not difficult. One only had to be honest. One correct reply would have been:

"Who would be so naïve as to believe today that there exists any such thing as banking secrecy? It was approximately ten years ago that Switzerland surrendered banking secrecy to the US State Department. That was the end of banking secrecy internationally. Only banks set up with the specific intention of stealing our money still promise secrecy. The higher the level of secrecy offered by an offshore bank, the more confident the offshore “bank” will be that you will not complain when they disappear with your money."

Why would it have been so difficult to explain such a basic fact to a correspondent? Better by far to be accused of excessive compliance with intrusive regulation than of incompetence or laziness, I would have thought.

Treasury

Commons Select Treasury Committee. The Labour Party has been in power in the UK since 1997. Since then, it has restricted the freedom of Anguilla and the other Overseas Territories to offer international financial services, even though we are some of the world's leading tax and asset protection havens. For decades before that, British governments promoted these offshore havens, encouraging their growth and expansion. Now, the UK has forced 'reforms' on us. They have made it clear that the intention is to end financial privacy.

They demand total bank and investment account surveillance.

They have made foreign tax evasion a criminal offence.

They have forced disclosure of previously confidential information about true ownership of international business corporations.

They have imposed the EU savings tax directive.

They are insisting that we sign Tax Information Exchange Agreements with the United States.

They have imposed new 'international standards' against money laundering.

They have demanded that our financial systems become more 'transparent'.

We are obliged to cooperate with foreign law enforcement and tax authorities.

Thus was the Labour Government's policies imposed on us without any chance of appeal on our part.

As a result, we have adopted strict anti-money laundering, and know-your customer rules. It makes opening a bank account in Anguilla a nightmare of bureaucracy and technicalities.

Then, in March 2008, the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee published a report on Financial Stability and Transparency. In it, the Committee indicated that it intended to undertake further work into International Financial Centres in the context of their ongoing scrutiny of financial stability and transparency. They would seek to ascertain what risk, if any, such entities pose to financial stability in the UK.

On 30 April of this year, the Committee announced its inquiry into Offshore Financial Centres and invited interested parties to submit written evidence.

All of the submissions can be found here.

Why are the international financial centres under attack again? I am not entirely sure. It seems likely that we are to be collateral damage arising out of the Northern Rock debacle in the UK. The question then must be asked, what, if anything, are we doing to protect our own interests?

Guernsey is one of our sister financial centres. They have come out fighting in their own defence.

Jersey has been quick to respond to the urgent need to meet with the committee to defend Jersey's interests.

I have not heard of any initiative sponsored by either the Anguilla Financial Services Association or the government of Anguilla. The governor's office has not produced a single release on this inquiry. The Ministry of Finance has not made any response. Are they all being too complacent?

Is AFSA even aware of the serious challenges it faces as a result of this inquiry?

Is this another case where we in Anguilla will ignore all that is published, all that is swirling in the air around us, and then complain later that nobody told us anything, and how abused we are by the foreign oppressors?

Banking Policy

Anguilla Banks’ Dirty Little Secret. A reader has sent me this heartfelt complaint. I am sure that at one time or the other we have all wondered about the same thing.

I had cause to question interest received from NBA recently. Let’s say that the hypothetical balances in a certain quarter were:

Day# ---- Description ---- Amount ------------ New Balance

0 ---- Brought forward -------- 0 ---------------- 1,000

1 ---- Deposit ------------ 99,000 ------------- 100,000

8 ---- Deposit ----------- 200,000 ------------- 300,000

My expectation would be that NBA (in this case) would calculate 1,000 times 91 days at the appropriate interest rate (say 3%) so $1,000 x (91/365) x 3%, then a further 99,000 x ([91 minus 1]/365) x 3%, then a further 200,000 x ([91-8]/365) x 3% - or something like that. In other words, if the bank has the use of your money for a period of time, it pays you interest based on the time it has the $ as well as the amount.

NBA replied that they calculate the interest based on the lowest balance in the quarter. In the above example, the lowest balance in the quarter would be $1,000, so you would get $1,000 x (91/365) x 3% - period. Does that sound right? Or is it a case of people being robbed by the pen rather than the gun?

And now, a song sung by, inter alia, Pete Seeger:

The Banks are Made of Marble

A Song by Les Rice

I've traveled round this country
From shore to shining shore
It really made me wonder
The things I heard and saw.

I saw the weary farmer
Plowing sod and loam
l heard the auction hammer
A knocking down his home.

But the banks are made of marble
With a guard at every door
And the vaults are stuffed with silver
That the farmer sweated for.

l saw the seaman standing
Idly by the shore
l heard the bosses saying
Got no work for you no more.

But the banks are made of marble
With a guard at every door
And the vaults are stuffed with silver
That the seaman sweated for.

I saw the weary miner
Scrubbing coal dust from his back
I heard his children cryin
Got no coal to heat the shack.

But the banks are made of marble
With a guard at every door
And the vaults are stuffed with silver
That the miner sweated for.

I've seen my brothers working
Throughout this mighty land
l prayed we'd get together
And together make a stand.

Final Chorus
Then we'd own those banks of marble
With a guard at every door
And we'd share those vaults of silver
That we have sweated for.

What about you? Do you think the banks are taking advantage by calculating interest based on the lowest balance, even if only for one day? I believe that the banks pay interest by the month. They would pay on the lowest balance in the account for the month, not the quarter, as suggested above. If I deposited $500,000 on 2 April and paid it out on 30 May the bank would have had my money for two months of April and May, less two days. But, they would not pay me any interest, as neither was a full calendar month? Perhaps, someone at one of the banks can tell us the rationale. I had enquired of NBA several days ago. Someone had promised a response. None arrived up to the date of publication.