{"version":1,"type":"rich","provider_name":"Libsyn","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.libsyn.com","height":90,"width":600,"title":"Why it might be time to revisit a key FDIC ratio","description":"What kind of difference can a single ratio make? In a new  ABA DataBank essay, ABA\u2019s Patrick Mitchell and Brittany Kleinpaste discuss the FDIC\u2019s 2% Designated Reserve Ratio target for the Deposit Insurance Fund. This target \u2014 established by statute but set at the FDIC\u2019s discretion \u2014 is a level higher than the DIF\u2019s Minimum Reserve Ratio of 1.35%, and it has been 2% since it was first established in 2010. On the latest episode of the ABA Banking Journal Podcast \u2014 sponsored by Q2 Software \u2014 Mitchell and Kleinpaste discuss the simulations that were used to set the ratio 16 years ago and why it might be time for the FDIC to revisit them. Incorporating data going back to the savings and loan crisis, the simulation is not based on the most current data. It also relied on banks\u2019 provisioning data amid the post-financial crisis fallout without taking into account the lower ultimate cost of bank failures. Ultimately, an up-to-date simulation incorporating more current data may allow the FDIC to meet its goals of covering the industry with a different ratio.   Read Mitchell and Kleinpaste\u2019s essay and a related  technical analysis.  ","author_name":"ABA Banking Journal Podcast","author_url":"https:\/\/bankingjournal.aba.com\/tag\/podcast\/","html":"<iframe title=\"Libsyn Player\" style=\"border: none\" src=\"\/\/html5-player.libsyn.com\/embed\/episode\/id\/42198805\/height\/90\/theme\/custom\/thumbnail\/yes\/direction\/forward\/render-playlist\/no\/custom-color\/88AA3C\/\" height=\"90\" width=\"600\" scrolling=\"no\"  allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen><\/iframe>","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/assets.libsyn.com\/secure\/content\/204413785"}