Close Menu
  • Home
  • Finance News
  • Personal Finance
  • Investing
  • Cards
    • Credit Cards
    • Debit
  • Insurance
  • Loans
  • Mortgage
  • More
    • Save Money
    • Banking
    • Taxes
    • Crime
What's Hot

Podcast 109: Social Security & Medicare: What’s Changing and What It Means for You with Mark Miller

March 27, 2026

If the USPS Runs Out of Money, Will You Still Get Mail?

March 27, 2026

Is ETF overlap hurting your portfolio? How to check and the best tools to use

March 27, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Smart SpendingSmart Spending
Subscribe
  • Home
  • Finance News
  • Personal Finance
  • Investing
  • Cards
    • Credit Cards
    • Debit
  • Insurance
  • Loans
  • Mortgage
  • More
    • Save Money
    • Banking
    • Taxes
    • Crime
Smart SpendingSmart Spending
Home»Banking»Pulaski Bank’s failure marks the most expensive since 2019
Banking

Pulaski Bank’s failure marks the most expensive since 2019

June 25, 2025No Comments3 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Telegram Pinterest Tumblr Reddit WhatsApp Email
Pulaski Bank’s failure marks the most expensive since 2019
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

Pulaski Savings Bank’s failure was the costliest relative to size of any U.S. bank in nearly six years, according to S&P Capital IQ. 

The Chicago bank’s failure will cost the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.’s Deposit Insurance Fund 57.6% of its total assets at the time of failure, or $28.5 million, more than double the 24.8% median cost compared to assets of U.S. bank failures since 1998, S&P Global Market Intelligence data showed.

Texas-based Enole State Bank’s downfall due to fraud in 2019 cost the fund 73.5% of its total assets, or $27 million, the data showed.

What caused Pulaski Savings Bank to fail?

Pulaski, which held $49.5 million in assets at the time of failure, was shut down by its state regulators and taken over by the FDIC in January after a third-party contractor discovered that at least $20.7 million in deposit liabilities were missing from the bank’s core system. Millennium Bank of Des Plaines, Illinois, assumed all $42.7 million of Pulaski’s deposits and purchased $45 million of its assets.

The failure was also the 11th costliest since 1998, defying a recent trend as Pulaski and Enole are the only two failures in the top 20 since 2013, the data showed. 

The FDIC’s Office of Inspector General determined that the cost of Pulaski’s failure warrants an in-depth review. The inspector general’s office will also look into suspected fraud, a common factor in costly bank failures, as part of the review. If fraud is found, the office will refer the matter to the appropriate authorities.

See also  CFPB implements new requirements for complaints on its portal

Comparing Pulaski to other major failures

Although Pulaski’s failure is one of the costliest relative to size, its total cost still pales in comparison to other failures, such as the 2023 failures of California-based banks Silicon Valley Bank at $20 billion and First Republic Bank at $13 billion, the data showed.

Pulaski hadn’t recorded positive earnings since 2005 and had a capital adequacy, asset quality, management capabilities, earnings sufficiency, liquidity position and sensitivity to market risk (CAMELS) rating of three from 2017 to 2023 due to deficient earnings, capital erosion and poor management oversight, the inspector generals office post-mortem report found.

Despite the signs of financial struggle, the FDIC and the Illinois state regulator failed to catch the deposit error. Regulators also faced backlash in 2023. 

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in April that refocusing regulation is the most important reform along with tailoring, and Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman said earlier this month that supervisory focus has moved away from primary financial risks.

Source link

Banks expensive failure Marks Pulaski
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Previous ArticleWatch Fed Chair Jerome Powell testify live before Senate banking panel
Next Article Paying for your own cell phone plan

Related Posts

Fed Govs. express concern about inflation due to Iran war

March 27, 2026

Fed narrowly approves Morgan Stanley plan for German arm

March 27, 2026

Why BMO sees California expansion as key to future growth

March 26, 2026
Add A Comment
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Top Posts

Company behind cash-advance app takes Election Day roller-coaster ride

November 7, 2024

Stablecoins offer multiple opportunities to support community banks | PaymentsSource

February 26, 2026

Judge tosses Trump’s Capital One debanking suit, for now

March 24, 2026
Ads Banner

Subscribe to Updates

Subscribe to Get the Latest Financial Tips and Insights Delivered to Your Inbox!

Stay informed with our finance blog! Get expert insights, money management tips, investment strategies, and the latest financial news to help you make smart financial decisions.

We're social. Connect with us:

Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube
Top Insights

Podcast 109: Social Security & Medicare: What’s Changing and What It Means for You with Mark Miller

March 27, 2026

If the USPS Runs Out of Money, Will You Still Get Mail?

March 27, 2026

Is ETF overlap hurting your portfolio? How to check and the best tools to use

March 27, 2026
Get Informed

Subscribe to Updates

Subscribe to Get the Latest Financial Tips and Insights Delivered to Your Inbox!

© 2026 Smartspending.ai - All rights reserved.
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.