This message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (PeaceWave) on Fri Mar 27, 2026, 06:46 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Even if the Dem's bill passed and got by SCOTUS, banks would say something like "okay, now it's 2.25% no matter how much you put in, but if you deposit 100K or more and leave it in for 2 years, you get eleventy million Frequent Flyer Miles" or the like.
You'd have to pass a lot legislation in order to make illegal every form of incentive for leaving a lot of money invested in the bank, some forms of which may've already passed muster with SCOTUS 
It's even in the CFPB documentation. As long as the banks accurately disclose the tiers, then do what they promised, and don't discriminate against protected classes (like race, sex, age, etc), this structure is all pretty well-documented as being legal.
In the U.S., deposit interest rates were heavily regulated under Regulation Q from the 1930s until the 1980s, but even then banks distinguished between types and sizes of deposits (e.g., large denomination certificates of deposit for institutional or wealthy customers) and paid different rates on them.
Once those caps were dismantled in the late 1970s–1980s, banks quickly formalized what had been informal practice into advertised “tiered‑rate accounts,” where specific balance bands earned different rates; today this structure is standard enough that regulators and legal glossaries treat “tiered‑rate account” as a defined product type.
I agree with you that's it's pretty bullshit, but so many things are when it comes to money and how everything is set up for the rich to get richer
