SVB customers who lost their deposits remain on the hook for loans
This article feels like rich people who were trying to get around US law&#x2F;regulations&#x2F;taxes now wanting the protections afforded by it.<p>They deposited money in SVB&#x27;s Cayman Islands subsidiary (a country that&#x27;s a well-known tax haven). SVB goes under and the Cayman Islands have no deposit insurance so their deposits are wiped out. Now they want their money back or their debt forgiven. The SVB Cayman deposits didn&#x27;t pay into the FDIC insurance fund so they shouldn&#x27;t be given the protection of the FDIC.<p>The title of the article makes it sound like some poor SVB &quot;customers&quot; are in a bad situation. The truth is that it&#x27;s going to be venture capital, private equity, and some really wealthy individuals (who were probably trying to dodge taxes). It&#x27;s hard to feel bad for extremely rich people using a well-known tax haven losing some money. The WSJ is really burying the lead in this story. If you&#x27;re trying to avoid US laws, regulations, and taxes, you can&#x27;t come looking for US protections.<p>EDIT: In a previous article on the topic, the WSJ noted &quot;The financial pain being felt by SVB’s foreign depositors could make investment firms that are incorporated or doing business in offshore financial hubs reconsider where they should put their money and what protections they have&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wsj.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;cayman-islands-regulator-exploring-legal-options-after-fdic-seized-svb-deposits-b00704ae" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wsj.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;cayman-islands-regulator-explor...</a><p>We don&#x27;t want to incentivize people to dodge taxes while thinking they&#x27;ll enjoy all the protections paid for by taxes.