FDIC has to make a decision about risk. There's no way they have done enough diligence to have a complete picture of liabilities (e.g. to find any non-public problems).

FDIC should pay early (Monday-Tuesday, not anytime "next week" as they've indicated so far) and should pay a big chunk, even though it's not completely safe.

Every day that goes by with uncertainty, the cost of the fear grows.

Why wouldn't there be a way? They're a government corporation with a $2bn budget, thousands of employees, whose only purpose is to oversee this kind of event. And it's not like they've been overwhelmed with work recently. The bankruptcy was only made public Friday, but they've been working on it for longer than that. Yes, they've certainly done their due diligence.

> The bankruptcy was only made public Friday, but they've been working on it for longer than that.

Not much longer. It's only Thursday's run that tipped SVB into insolvency.

> It's only Thursday's run that tipped SVB into insolvency.

What triggers in their holdings do you think started the run?

I think we understand that differing mark-to-market rules between GAAP and banking regulations were important here.

So, legally speaking what authority does the Treasury Department have to make depositors whole beyond the legally guaranteed $250,000 insured and an equal share up to the amount of their deposits of the auctioned and liquidated assets?

The question I have is do some of the proceeds of the liquidation get used for $250,000 insurance payout first? Or do the tax payers get to help?

> The question I have is do some of the proceeds of the liquidation get used for $250,000 insurance payout first?

Yup. FDIC gets the bank, and has to pay the insured amount. Then, the remainder must be managed for the benefit of depositors, other creditors, and shareholders. Any shortfall of the insured amount can be paid from the deposit insurance fund.

> Or do the tax payers get to help?

The FDIC deposit insurance fund is paid for by banks.