Leonidas
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
It is a savings account, or as it is called at most credit unions, a "share account". From what I've read on other CU and bank websites, the limitation on transfers commonly applies to both MM and savings. Looking at info on Reg D on some websites like NCUA and similar, where the target audience are bankers, the specific reference is to what are called "non-transaction" accounts.Have not read the whole thread again to get up to date..... but is your account a savings account or a money market account?
I do not think this applies to 'savings accounts' like you had mentioned, but only to money market accounts....
Regulation D created the difference between transaction and non-transaction accounts to regulate a financial institution's required reserves. The reserves are based on the amount they have in unlimited transaction accounts (checking) so the checks will be covered if the institution wakes up dead tomorrow morning. If they allowed unlimited transactions out of other accounts (savings, etc), then the theory is that they would have to cover those in their reserves also. There's more money in savings accounts, MMA, CD's, etc than there is in checking, so the bank would have to radically increase how much they have sitting around down at the fed (not earning interest).
Non-transaction accounts, which I think should be called "limited numbers of certain kinds of transaction accounts" are mostly everything other than checking. So, savings, MMA, CD's, savings clubs and the like are all limited in the number of certain type of transactions you can do each month. The limited transactions are internet based banking, telephone based transfers, automated transfers, etc. Those that aren't limited are ATM based, in-person at the bank, cashier's checks payable to you, to pay loans at the same institution, overdrafts to checking, and other electronic transfers like ACH and ETFs.
Interest bearing checking had its own set of rules that I didn't bother to read.
I'm not sure I agree with the reasoning behind this. Not given how quickly money moves today and with real-time computer databases it would seem banks would be in a better spot to know exactly how much they have "at risk" in outstanding, and potentially outstanding, transactions floating around in the ether.