Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

clevelandfed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#81

Post by lotsofpulp »

cvalka wrote: post #76
lotsofpulp wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only the smallest local bank or credit union would not have the ability to transfer money online via ACH for their customers. Pretty much everyone can login, go to the transfers tab, and enter an account/routing number to transfer money to (or give their account/routing number to another bank to transfer money in). If you do not, then you should probably sign up for a free account at any of the multitude of online ba…

Are you able to do outgoing ACH and wire transfers to third party accounts online as an individual?

Yes, all you need is an account number and routing number. I have done this at BoA, Chase, Marcus, Ally, TD Bank, CIT Bank, Key Bank, Wells Fargo, Citibank, Capital One, Schwab, etc.

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#82

Post by lotsofpulp »

happymellon wrote: post #77
cuuupid wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know how this devolved into an America bashing thread but it’s worth noting that cheque transactions have other causes. You could make the same argument about the popularity of cash as a payment method abroad. ACH sucks but Zelle is at least second party; every major bank supports it and I don’t need any details to transfer money beyond their phone number.

I didn't mean for this to be an American bashing thread I'm just surprised that it's taken this long. Zelle is not universal, I think it's around 20% of banks/credit unions don't support it, and has high fees associated with it. It's good to see the Fed doing something about it.

I have never seen an fee associated with transferring money with Zelle.

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#83

Post by youainti »

gsatic wrote: post #22

Fed is moving so slowly compared to China or India. Going to be left in the dust soon. They need to open settlements up to everyone not just "financial institutions". Fed deposit accounts for everyone or Interest bearing CBDCs should be rolled out to every one. The fucking banks need to be disintermediated from all transaction involving Depositors. Convert them to pure lenders. If the goal is to "improve settlement e…

This separation of payment processing on the one hand and savings and loans on the other is something I hope to see in CBDC proposals.

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#84

Post by Animats »

seewhydee wrote: post #74
Animats wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm wondering about that. This is a debit transaction that clears within seconds. The recipient has good funds immediately and can take them out of the destination bank, just like a wire transfer. Or, for that matter, cryptocurrency. ACH is daily. It really is a batch system, with a daily batch at 4:30 PM Eastern Time, and settles around 6 PM. There's a whole "undo" system built into ACH. FedNow does not have "undo".…

There are tons of everyday use-cases where it's preferable to sacrifice fraud protection to achieve instantaneous money transfer. Credit card companies have normalized using credit cards (with their attendant fees) for all sorts of small-denomination transactions, like public transportation, where the fraud protection machinery of the credit card system is of negligible benefit; it's a rip-off.

That makes sense for those stored value "gift" cards that are on racks at drugstores. But FedNow allows transfers of up to $100,000 at launch. That's big for instant irrevocable transfers.

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#85

Post by cvalka »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #81
cvalka wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you able to do outgoing ACH and wire transfers to third party accounts online as an individual?

Yes, all you need is an account number and routing number. I have done this at BoA, Chase, Marcus, Ally, TD Bank, CIT Bank, Key Bank, Wells Fargo, Citibank, Capital One, Schwab, etc.

TD bank does not support this!

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#86

Post by lotsofpulp »

cvalka wrote: post #85
lotsofpulp wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, all you need is an account number and routing number. I have done this at BoA, Chase, Marcus, Ally, TD Bank, CIT Bank, Key Bank, Wells Fargo, Citibank, Capital One, Schwab, etc.

TD bank does not support this!

Oh yes, I guess I misremembered. Well I guess there’s a reason I stopped using them. Anyway, lots of banks do, and I would switch to one that does let you do it.

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#87

Post by happymellon »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #82
happymellon wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't mean for this to be an American bashing thread I'm just surprised that it's taken this long. Zelle is not universal, I think it's around 20% of banks/credit unions don't support it, and has high fees associated with it. It's good to see the Fed doing something about it.

I have never seen an fee associated with transferring money with Zelle.

That has to be the worst take in this entire thread.

Zelle does a debit charge over the Visa and MasterCard networks. Larger institutions get discounts on these networks through volume agreements, while smaller ones have to eat the larger charges per transaction because larger banks don't pass their smaller costs on.

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#88

Post by happymellon »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #80
happymellon wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that a problem? The biggest banks got together and created a new network for transfers, and charge all the smaller banks fees to access it? It sounds like another method of crushing competition.

Well they allow any other bank/credit union to use it, and based on the fact that 1,600 financial institutions participate/80%+ of the US population, it must not be costly (or or is free). It sounds like the US government was asleep at the wheel and the big banks got together and did what they had to to enable US residents to be able to instantly send money to each other electronically.

You need to read up on it. It uses the Visa and MasterCard networks. It is not free.

Bank of America and Wells Fargo do not get charged the same as your local Credit Union. So smaller institutions get screwed.

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#89

Post by happymellon »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #23
radlad wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, Zelle qualifies as a terrible 3rd party app... My landlord takes payment via Zelle, and I tried to setup a payment from Discover but it told me that my limit was something ridiculously low like $500. I called to ask them to increase it and they said they were unable to. Meanwhile, I can send huge amounts from my Ally bank account with Zelle...

Sounds like your bank (Discover) is restricting you from transferring a certain amount of money. Why would you hold that against Zelle?

Because Zelle chose to use Visa and MasterCard.

Why would you hold it against Discover to prefer to not use Visa and MasterCard networks?

Re: An update on the Federal Reserve’s Instant Payments Service

#90

Post by ProllyInfamous »

senectus1 wrote: post #40
ProllyInfamous wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because BRICS will adopt a gold-backed currency to resolve oil transactions without USDollars. This should happen late August.

lol BRICS is a predictable failure.

You're not going to reliably bully people away from transaction their species-backed stores of value for petroleum. Particularly not dozens of non-USDollar-backed countries eager to transact differently.

See: recent price of gold and bitcoin and oil (and stock market, in general) IE: NOT USD

See, also: several countries request physical return of their alleged gold holdings

Post reply on HN