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

FedNow Is Live

federalreserve.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: FedNow Is Live

#901

Post by flagrant_taco »

tjpnz wrote: post #149

I don't understand why FedNow and CBDC are such a big issue in the US. FedNow looks quite attractive from a fees perspective, especially when compared to PayPal and alike. Part of me wonders if the middlemen who stand to lose out might be trying to muddy the waters. It wouldn't be the first time.

Many of the arguments revolve around concerns that the government will gain too much control, power, and personal information. It the government directly controls financial transactions they know every transaction we make, and more importantly can deny transactions they don't like.

Arguably the US government effectively has these powers today, but beingtthat they don't directly own our banks there is a level of red tape they have to go through. As long as they are technically separate there is also the opportunity for us to change the laws and strip them of that access, once combined we give up that possibility.

The US was originally design with a very strong distrust of our own federal government. For the last 80 years we've completely flipped the script and given more and more power to a massive federal government, but the undertone of distrust is still around for quite a few Americans.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#903

Post by flagrant_taco »

kelnos wrote: post #545
hitpointdrew wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't understand why ~FedNow and CBDC~ BIG BROTHER are such a big issue in the US. Fixed this for you. I don't really want a gigantic federal agency having insight into every financial transaction I make. Hard, fucking, pass.

Ignoring the fact that FedNow doesn't change much in this regard... I'm torn on this. Visa, MasterCard, Venmo (aka PayPal), etc. all know about large subsets of my transactions, and they go and sell my personal data to other companies in sleazy ways to cover their costs. Is that better or worse than the government knowing all this stuff? Sure, the government can also legally use force against me and deprive me of my…

We can stop private companies from selling that data if we wanted to. Once the federal government has direct control of our financial transactions, how do we limit what they can do with that power?

The point of keeping the government out of the banking business would be to keep the door cracked for the chance to improve it later. That door slams shut once the federal government has the insights into every transaction, and more importantly the ability to deny ones they don't want us to do. We also Wil have much less control over the creation of a social credit score, theoretically the government would have everything it needs to make that happen with control over our transactions.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#904

Post by Symbiote »

scarface_74 wrote: post #728
kelnos wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So presumably they are interested in offering consumers the ability to pay for Netflix using FedNow instead of a credit card. I do wonder how stuff like this will shake out. I will use a credit card, always, with any vendor that doesn't pass along credit card fees to the customer in some way. (Why would I choose otherwise? The credit card gives me rewards, and better fraud protection.) But more and more, I see comp…

I’m going to lose $30 a month in discounts with T-mobile if I don’t switch to debit card or checking account. T-mobile has a horrible history when it comes to security. I definitely don’t want to give them access to my checking account

What are the rights of the T-mobile customer in the USA, if they somehow do mess up an automatic bill payment?

I'm searching using the European/international term for this sort of payment ("direct debit usa") which gives me API documentation from many American payment providers, but nothing about the customer's rights. I assume it's the technical term there, and there's another term used with the public.

(In Britain and the EU this kind of bill-paying agreement has very strong rights for the payer, they can ask their bank to reverse any transaction for a long time without giving a reason. My online banking interfaces have easy buttons to do this, or to block future transfers.)

Re: FedNow Is Live

#905

Post by Symbiote »

elyobo wrote: post #873
withinboredom wrote: post #848

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I moved to Europe in 2018. The banking system is decades more advanced than the US. At least where I am, no restaurant will “split a check” and one person is expected to pay. We settle the bill between each other in a matter of seconds. Most bills are paid using this exact system. Credit cards are very rarely used except in-person. Since you have to accept (or tell your bank to always accept certain vendors) debits u…

Inability to "split a cheque" is still a very annoying limitation; completely normal behaviour to do this in NZ, still moderately weird in Australia (although it's got better). The ability to resolve this electronically rather than with cash makes it less bad, but still easier and faster to resolve it in store.

The GP shouldn't be generalizing across Europe with that statement. It's somewhere between completely wrong, half wrong and correct depending which of the 50 European countries are included.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#906

Post by 1000bestlives »

evantbyrne wrote: post #515
634636346 wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are still almost 5k banks in the US. Unlike Zelle, if this opens to all of them, all you need is one bank.

I presume the system uses bank account and routing numbers? So besides concerns with sharing that information with the public, concerned citizens will figure out who they bank with, and will most likely be able to easily pressure the bank to drop them. Certain things should be difficult to accomplish in a functional society anyways, and administering a profitable hate group is one of those things. If not bankrupted b…

Nobody on KF is innocent. You talk like someone who has a thread about them

Re: FedNow Is Live

#907

Post by shubb »

PeterStuer wrote: post #818
cj wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can think of 0 occasions where I’ve given anyone my bank account info who isn’t a commercial organization (employer, electric company, etc). I had no idea it was the opposite in the UK. Edit: with the exception of writing physical checks, of course. I use those when the receiver doesn’t accept Venmo or Apple Pay.

I remember my father had a checkbook in the 1970's. I never had one, not sure they even exist here anymore (Belgium). For payments to friends we use bank apps. Usually the receiver generates a QR code for the payment on their phone, which you scan from your bank app, sign with a pincode, and the payment is executed immediately. If you are not near you can also use their account number to transfer money instantly.

I got a cheque book with my first real bank account in 2004, and felt like a real grown up. In the time since, I have written 2 cheques.

However, I have cashed some cheques - a tax refund cheque and a refund for my remaining balance when I closed a utilities account.

They have the advantage, for the sender, that you can discharge your responsibility to offer a refund by sending a letter, rather than having to interact with the other party. Of course these days you could email them a link to a web form.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#908

Post by zrail »

sgent wrote: post #701
eru wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't you already send money from bank A to bank B without Venmo? Isn't that the whole point of bank transfers?

There are three methods to do so: 1) Write a physical check (2-10 days from deposit, usually 2) 2) Use ACH (a virtual check) (2-10 days, usually 2) 3) Fedwire which costs $10-$15 to both the sender and receiver (15 minutes).

There are some banks that give free Fedwire transfers, often just to higher account tiers. Fidelity Investments gives free Fedwire to everyone, though.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#909

Post by ctvo »

TylerE wrote: post #805
hunter2_ wrote: post #794

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most people don't want to share their bank account numbers While far less common these days, people gave this information to arbitrary payees (via personal checks) for decades. The idea that it's not to be given to payers, despite it having been given to arbitrary payees, seems misguided. If someone tries to commit fraud with that number, they're probably going to get caught, making it sufficiently unlikely, no?

Seems to me a big part of why something like this should exist is so personal checks can just die, as they should have years ago. Crappy usability, no security, abysmal throughput and latency.

This is orthogonal to the original point. Passing around your checking account number isn’t that big of a security risk. We do it now and banks have built guard rails in place because we do it now.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#910

Post by konschubert »

HoyaSaxa wrote: post #482
aidenn0 wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the eventual end-game that I can send money from my account at Bank A, to a friend's account at Bank B to split a check at dinner without using a third party like Venmo?

Yes, that is absolutely a use case. Similar to Venmo, there is also a Request for Payment (RFP) mechanism. I'm on the Request for Payment (RFP) Work Group that is composed of a number of financial institutions, service providers, and billers. Netflix is part of the RFP Work Group. So presumably they are interested in offering consumers the ability to pay for Netflix using FedNow instead of a credit card. Instead of N…

Why should they not be able to find a bank that charges Other than with credit cards, there are no costs for customer kickbacks and chargebacks.
Post reply on HN