Tuesday, February 6, 2018

Fed Grants Conditional Approval to Pot-Focused CU Serving

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City has granted conditional approval to a Colorado credit union to serve marijuana businesses.

To win the approval of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Four Corner Credit Union had to modify its business plan to only serve individuals and companies that support legalized marijuana, not state-licensed dispensaries.

Four Corner Credit Union sued the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City three years ago.

However, before the credit union becomes fully operational, it will have to obtain deposit insurance. The National Credit Union Administration has previously rejected Fourth Corner’s application.

Read the story (subscription required).
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

6 comments:

  1. AnonymousFebruary 6, 2018 at 6:38 PM

    Definitely part of the original intent of Congress.
    Most def a cu serving folks of modest means.
    Surely worthy of a federal tax exemption.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousFebruary 7, 2018 at 12:14 PM

    The "original" intent? The original intent of Congress was NO interstate banking. That changed in the 1980s. If CUs have to go back to 1930's Congressional intent, then banks must also return to original Congressional intent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousFebruary 8, 2018 at 5:48 AM

      Typical convenient thinking of credit union sheep.
      Pull out the bank card, like Pavlov s dog.
      No one said don’t let credit unions expand and grow on the exact same basis as banks.
      All for it.
      Exact same basis means remove the federal tax exemption.
      “I want it all but don’t want to pay taxes”.
      The whining credit union battle cry.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousFebruary 9, 2018 at 11:59 AM

      Please stop the insults. My comment about interstate banking. What did the banks pay to get that right? In fact, CUs had to pay with financial privacy regulations because US Bank screwed up. We got additional regulations while banks got additional powers for the additional regulations.

      I am for credit unions paying taxes IF AND ONLY IF we get full banking powers. Credit unions should not be screwed by the banking industry like the S&Ls in the 1950s. Full taxes for full powers.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousFebruary 9, 2018 at 4:59 PM

      when credit unions get taxed (when not if), it will come with full powers.
      the cu "me and my goodness against the world and its badness" is tiring, useless and not true.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousFebruary 9, 2018 at 11:16 PM

      I am glad you have faith in the US Senate which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the banking industry.

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
 

The content is provided for educational purposes only, with the understanding that neither the authors, contributors, nor the publishers of this site are engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other expert or professional services. If legal or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Comments appearing in response to articles appearing on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the ABA. ABA makes no representations regarding the truth or accuracy of commentary or opinions that may be posted in response to the articles that appear on this website.

The inclusion herein of any link to a website, either in the text of an article or in a comment, does not denote any approval, sponsorship, or endorsement by the ABA, and ABA is not responsible for the content or opinions expressed on those linked websites or related commentary. This content is not licensed to third parties sites and is not affiliated with any third party site. Any reference to the author or this content on any third party site on the Internet is not authorized by the ABA.

It is the policy of the American Bankers Association to comply fully with all antitrust laws. Certain discussions should be considered off-limits, including those that contain competitively sensitive data such as price and cost information, or statements that could be construed as reflecting an attempt or desire to control or influence a particular market or markets. Future pricing or other prospective competitive information should never be shared.