She's Suing the Fed To Open a Rothbardian Bitcoin Bank
Caitlin Long's Custodia Bank will hold 108 percent of customer funds on deposit...if the Federal Reserve will allow it to open.
HD DownloadCaitlin Long wants to start a new kind of bank…based on a very old model.
"A 100 percent reserve bank that would keep all of our cash at the Fed," she says. She was influenced by the work of Austrian economist Murray Rothbard, who saw fractional reserve banking as "a shell game, [and] a Ponzi scheme," arguing that banks should work exactly like safety-deposit boxes, or "money warehouses," required to keep all of their customers' money on hand at all time.
Long has a law degree from Harvard and had a conventional career on Wall Street, working at Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse, and Salomon Brothers. After the 2008 financial crisis, she thought all of the standard accounts explaining the meltdown fell short. In search of a better framework, she discovered the Austrians and Rothbard.
"The concept here is, let's just turn this into a basic money warehouse to the maximum extent possible within the law," Long tells Reason.
In March 2023, when rumors started circulating on Twitter that Silicon Valley Bank might be in trouble, its panicked customers withdrew $42 billion from their accounts in a single day, leaving it with a negative cash balance. In short order, regulators shut it down.
It was a classic run on the bank, which is a phenomenon that's only possible because of a standard practice known as "fractional-reserve banking," in which the money in your account isn't actually sitting in your account. The money banks hold for you is mostly loaned out or invested. They just need to make sure that they have enough cash on hand to cover any withdrawals. The system works fine—until everyone comes for their money at once.
"A lot more people in the world now recognize that the money in their bank is an I.O.U. to a leveraged institution," says Long. "Most people didn't think about that until recently."
So she founded Custodia Bank, based in Wyoming, which will hold 108 percent of its customers' deposits in cash at all times, serving as a true Rothbardian money warehouse that will also custody bitcoin for interested customers.
In January, the Federal Reserve Board denied its application for a master Fed account, which would allow them to store cash and transact using Fed payment rails like every other major bank. Custodia has sued the Fed to force it to reverse that decision.
"They're basically creating a federal veto that has never in the history of the United States existed," says Long. "And what I'm standing up for and saying is that it shouldn't be politicized, period."
Reason sat down with Long in Miami at the Bitcoin 2023 conference to talk about her case against the Fed, why she believes in full-reserve banking, and how Custodia could help bitcoin go mainstream.
Photo Credits: Minh Nguyen, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Tony Webster, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Lian Yi Xinhua News Agency/Newscom; Richard B. Levine/Newscom; Nicolas Economou/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Stefan Fussan, CC BY-SA 3.0 DE, via Wikimedia Commons; Ken Cedeno/Sipa USA/Newscom.
Music Credits: "Time to Move," by VESHZA.
- Editor: Adam Czarnecki
- Graphics: Regan Taylor
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Huh, interesting here that a long-time Wall Street insider only discovered Austrian economics after the crash. This may be less of an indictment of Long, and more of an indictment of the institutions that shepherded her into public life.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35,200 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,200 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link----------------------------------------->>> http://Www.OnlineCash1.Com
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
hy
Easily start receiving more than $600 every single day from home in your part time. i made $18781 from this job in my spare time afte my college. easy to do job and its regular income are awesome. no skills needed to do this job all you need to know is how to copy and paste stuff online. join this today by follow details on this page.
.
.
Apply Now Here—————————->>> https://Www.Coins71.Com
An easy and quick way to make money online by working part-time and earning an additional $15,000 or more. by working in my spare time in 1ce85 In my previous month (bgr-03), I made $17250, and this job has made me very happy. You can try this right now by following the instructions here
.
.
.
Check Profile______ Onlineweb7.com
This is called the “Simon banking system” and it’s a 100% reserve bank where you keep your money for a fee. The money is never used by the bank for investment, it’s just a custodian of your money. This type of bank is safe because your money is always there. If you want to risk your money for an interest income, you can put it in the fractional banking system at your own risk and without a guarantee from the Federal Reserve. That’s how the banking system should work in theory. Two types of banks in the financial market: Reserve Banks and Investment Banks. With this system, there's no need for a Federal Reserve. You can dynamite the Fed with this system and that's exactly the reason Long will never get her Bank approved by the Fed.
I'm not quite clear on the business model here. If it is just a money security company, then the company only gets its money from fees. I am not certain how many people will sign up for that- but good for her if she can manage it.
I think the likely end result is that the 108% reserve will soon be chipped away as the company goes through executives over the years, but YMMV. Caveat emptor.
I'm listening carefully to the interview now, and reading between the lines... carefully.
Her business model in the end, has little to do with Bitcoin. Bitcoin is an incidental detail. She's essentially creating a warehouse for _____________ instead of having or using fractional ___________ reserve banking. In fact, she even points out that you can do Fractional Bitcoin Banking "just as FTX did". There's a lot of "Financial whackbat" in the discussion, but she distills everything at one point in the interview saying that her model will never be the low-cost banking business, because it's fee based. "Financial whackbat" calls this "negative interest rates". She correctly points out this is because all the fractional banking systems are based upon a return on interest-based investments. She provides no such service. You warehouse your bitcoin with her, she has 100% of it in store, and she charges you a fee for it.
Right, and to me that is why warehousing is a better term.
Right, wrong or indifferent, people expect that banks should pay you (even nominally) for the right to hold your money. Maybe this takes off for her, but I doubt it, when FDIC gives even large holders a pretty good reason to put their money in a tradition fractional reserve bank.
In the first few episodes of What Is Money, Michael Saylor goes over an interesting dive into currencies. And he points out that any sort of third party warehousing necessarily has to be a Negative Interest Rate scheme. Someone is holding the asset for you, and that costs money. If it is just flat money, then inflation means you are always losing money. Which is why people doing "warehousing" are generally holding something else- crypto (but that's stupid to let someone else hold it), gold, art, fine wine, or whatever. There it makes sense to warehouse at a fee, because the price of those assets appreciates over time.
Right, wrong or indifferent, people expect that banks should pay you (even nominally) for the right to hold your money.
Yes, because we all intuitively know that the bank is "benefitting" from our money by lending it and investing it on other ventures. Her whole schtick (right wrong or indifferent) is that she claims this entire concept is "wrong" and we should move away from fractional reserve banking. At one point in the transcript-free video (ha! Somebody stop me, I'm on fire!) she believes that "the moment you try to create something out of nothing, you've got a market distortion". She is fundamentally against the very basis of F.R.B. because at some point, a bank will fail and if it can't sustain a run, then it isn't for real. I agree with her in principle, but it's not a hill I'm going to die on in practical terms.
There it makes sense to warehouse at a fee, because the price of those assets appreciates over time.
Does gold appreciate over time, or does it appreciate over time relative to the value of a dollar?
Six months ago I lost my job and after that I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a great website which literally saved me. I started working for them online and in a short time after I've started averaging 15k a month... The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start.
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)>>> https://www.Salarybiz.com
"A 100 percent reserve bank that would keep all of our cash at the Fed,"
How would this bank make any profit? A custodial or transaction fee? Then the depositor is assured of a negative APR.
Seriously, this is beyond stupid.
Yes, it is EXACTLY that.
Then the depositor is assured of a negative APR.
Yes, it is exactly that, as opposed to the genius of Silicon Valley Bank, who didn't have any of your holdings in the safe, so when you went to withdraw it, it wasn't there. You know, that kind of slick genius.
I would think that one way of making money would be using those different assets in custody as the basis for loans denominated in different units of account. But the only ideas I can think of involve commodities as that valuable asset not 'digital currency' as the asset.
When an asset becomes collateral for a loan it is no longer in reserve.
And the way a bank handles that is via time-deposits rather than on-demand deposits.
Plus, the way commodity loans would work over time is that the loan would be repaid with more commodity than was lent out. So the book of loans would become partially custodial assets and partially corporate assets.
When an asset becomes collateral for a loan it is no longer in reserve.
I love you, Overt, really I do, but what's the "asset" on a student loan? What's the "asset" on your crazy idea to revolutionize transportation in cities?
*sits down at loan officer’s desk*
Banker: So, what’s your business idea?
Me: *clears throat* I want you to think big on this one, Bob… run with me… Twitter… but for gay people *makes expansive gesture with arms*.
Banker: I like where this is going. It’ll help our DIE metrics with Blackrock… and after all it IS pride month. And really, does Pride Month really ever end?
*we both bust out laughing*
Me: Right? Right? We’re printing money here, Bob!
Banker: How much do you need?
Me: $100, $200 million tops… but with access to additional credit if needed.
Banker: Done.
A lot of things in the theoretical financial world work just great when everyone along the path is an honest or competent broker.
FDIC insurance is just a thing on paper, until your friends are the ones losing all the money, then we’ll bail you out dollar for dollar.
Which is exactly what Bitcoin is -- a perpetual zero-coupon bond that loses value over time.
the Federal Reserve Board denied its application for a master Fed account, which would allow them to store cash and transact using Fed payment rails like every other major bank. Custodia has sued the Fed to force it to reverse that decision.
I thought a major purpose of blockchain is as a payment rail that doesn't need a central institution like the Fed. I know bitcoin will never be that because it costs too much to transact. But why is it necessary to join the Fed to use its rail?
doesn’t need a central institution like the Fed.
Or third party intermediaries such as "exchanges". But I'm assured my understanding is too simple to understand these complicated things.
I can definitely see a time when real stuff will be bought in bitcoin and bitcoin won't need exchanges.
Course that day only comes when prices are denominated in bitcoin and bitcoin is no longer denominated in dollars as the basis for hype.
Because she doesn't just want to make a 100% reserve bitcoin bank.
She also wants to create a 100% reserve US dollar bank.
And she probably thinks storing the physical dollar bills in a safe would be too expensive or something.
Props to Zack Weismueller for bringing up the point that I’ve been criticized for pointing out– with receipts for quite some time: The original crypto cypherpunks said that Bitcoin will flourish [unregulated- and is unregulatable] alongside the old regulated systems because it can and will flourish entirely on its own.
She falls into the “it needs [light-touch] regulatin’” camp for it to be viable.
For sound economic perspective go to https://honesteconomics.substack.com/
Why use a "bank" like this when FDIC will cover you up to $250k? It makes little sense until the libertarian moment bulldozes the FDIC.
Why doesn't she just set up a load of safety deposit boxes and get a few PCs for BTC storage? No Fed needed.
While I invest most of my money in "real" things, like the stock market and income-producing real estate, I can understand the use for such a bank. I keep what most folks would call a rather large amount of cash liquid at all times. This cash is what I fall back on during financial crises, such as the most recent one. For that reason, I have never had to sell an investment at a loss. To that end, I keep such cash in an insured bank savings account, which, given inflation, still loses money, given the %.00000000001 interest rate (yeah, okay, it's a bit higher than that.) I don't reach the $250,000 threshold of deposit insurance, but if I can understand why folks who keep a LOT of cash on hand, would have use for such a bank. There is certainly no reason they shouldn't be allowed to operate.
I've been exploring ideas on housing costs, how to control them etc. I have come to the conclusion that the only way to fix "housing costs" is to have the culture entirely rethink how they view housing.
Your house should be an asset like your car. The moment you turn the key and cross the threshhold the first time, your house should lose ten percent of its value. If you add things to it, or invest heavily in it, expand its square footage, upgrade its materials, the market may agree that the value has held or gone up in direct proportion to the upgrades. Other than that, it's a depreciating asset.
If we were building more houses than folks wanted to buy, then that could actually happen – at least overall (some say we are 6.5 million homes short of demand).
But, as long as more people want to live in a particular market, where housing is limited by the amount of land available, prices will rise until nobody can afford them, at least in those areas.
A real Rothbardian wouldn't ask permission from a group of criminals.
So fractional reserve banking needs a buffer for runs on the bank. A clause in the depositors agreement with the bank should specify that the bank may choose to honor withdrawal requests with 30 days turnaround. Or maybe grant 10% of funds immediately with the rest to be funded at some time schedule.
This would provide stability for the bank, avoiding having to essentially liquidate all of it's lending positions overnight in order to satisfy a bank run.
Even George Bailey had the ability to give his customers IOUs in response to a surge in demand for withdrawal in the pre-regulatory era. It is regulation and insurance that made banks freeload off of the bail out largess of the government.
Banking would again be a boring and conservative industry if bankers had some real skin in the game.
She's Suing the Fed To Open a Rothbardian Bitcoin Bank
Will she be providing financial services to The Black Panthers and David Duke? I hope so, because those assholes deserve vaporware as their payout. 🙂