EQ 2% for one year and 2.5% for two years GICs | EQ Bank | Discussion forum

rhvic said
Got this on an email from EQ:

"FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY
2.00% on a 1-year GIC
2.50% on a 2-year GIC"

I suppose the quarterly 2% GIC at Hubert might be a bit more flexible, but for the moment their one year rate is competitive.  

I'm tempted to go for the 2-year GIC at EQ Bank.

Only if they have joint GIC. Still tempting.

I am not a lawyer, but...

If it's only in one name, it is solely the property of that person as long as it's in that one name. For purposes of inheritance, it doesn't matter where it came from or where you intend it to return to unless you set up a official loan for half of the deposit from the partner who is not listed on the account to the one who is. CRA has something to say about that sort of arrangement and you have to charge interest and assign income accordingly.

Normally, a single owner non-registered account becomes part of the estate of that person when they die, and will be dealt with according to the will and may incur probate tax.

If you set up a loan, I think that would be a liability on the estate and could be reclaimed thereby, but that would only get you half of the money and is not the same as a joint account.

I think EQ will eventually offer joint GICs, but it may take several years. Their market is youngish adults, so those young adults have to get to the point where they have money they want to invest in GICss couples. They would have to have already filled up their individual TFSAs more than likely.

Does EQ still force you to wait

7 days

after you deposit the cash before they buy the GIC?

KamWest said
Hubert is o so flexible with their quarterly term.  

But remember, the rates escalate: Q1 1.85%, 1.95%, 2.05%, 2.15% Q4
There is a loss/penalty for early maturity.

Bill said
Correct, when joint funds are voluntarily used to buy a single-name GIC the funds are no longer joint. The new owner can put the matured funds wherever they want, back to joint account (thus joint funds again) or elsewhere.  

Thanks for your reply, and same to Loonie. However based on my understanding of how it works, the new owner has no control over where the money goes upon maturity as you say, only EQ does and EQ only will put the money back into the joint account.

From that joint account, then either one can of course move the money to another joint or singular account with EQ or elsewhere. We have 2 EQ joint savings, each with different linked outside accounts - you see where I'm going with this setup if one dies while the GIC is outstanding.

Simply put, my view is clouded by an irrevocable (by the owner of the GIC, and EQ at the time the GIC is activated) deemed disposition location/beneficiary people, which is the joint account only.

My solution would be simple. Say nothing and let the GIC mature. However I'm going to "waste my time" and write EQ now and in the unlikely event I get some new information, I'll post it here.

KamWest said

rhvic said
Got this on an email from EQ:

"FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY
2.00% on a 1-year GIC
2.50% on a 2-year GIC"

I suppose the quarterly 2% GIC at Hubert might be a bit more flexible, but for the moment their one year rate is competitive.  

EQ has a 200k limit (I think) and Hubert has no limit.

Hubert is 100% insured and EQ is only insured to 100k

Hubert is o so flexible with their quarterly term.  

"Yes the literature says Hubert is 100% insured" - but it is also very clear that the Govt of Manitoba does NOT have a responsibility to guarantee deposits. So let's hope the DGCM never has to pick up the pieces in event of a failure.

canadian.100 said

EQ has a 200k limit (I think) and Hubert has no limit.

Hubert is 100% insured and EQ is only insured to 100k

Hubert is o so flexible with their quarterly term.  

"Yes the literature says Hubert is 100% insured" - but it is also very clear that the Govt of Manitoba does NOT have a responsibility to guarantee deposits. So let's hope the DGCM never has to pick up the pieces in event of a failure.  

Is DGCM part of the Manitoba Government?
DGCM is a Government Agency, established under The Manitoba Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Act. A Board of Directors, appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council of Manitoba, oversees DGCM.

Does the Government of Manitoba also cover deposits?
No. There is no legislated requirement for the Manitoba government to guarantee deposits.

Based on the above, since DGCM is a government agency, its effectively the Manitoba government, isnt it ?

I think of it as similar to CDIC, which is an independent crown corp established by the fed govt, so same as the govt itself

DGCM site says:
"Is DGCM part of the Manitoba Government?
DGCM is a Government Agency, established under The Manitoba Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires Act. A Board of Directors, appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council of Manitoba, oversees DGCM.
Does the Government of Manitoba also cover deposits?
No. There is no legislated requirement for the Manitoba government to guarantee deposits."

They're making the effort to be clear that Manitoba taxpayers have no legal requirement to backstop the fund (to which they also have not contributed in the first place, i.e. same as CDIC).

An agency established by gov't is not part of the gov't as is a ministry or department.

Safety seems to be the primary concern to high interest account and gic devotees, so to be safe it's best to operate on the assumption the Province would not bail out, though I suppose it's always possible it might if it has the capability and is in its interest.

dougjp said

Thanks for your reply, and same to Loonie. However based on my understanding of how it works, the new owner has no control over where the money goes upon maturity as you say, only EQ does and EQ only will put the money back into the joint account.

From that joint account, then either one can of course move the money to another joint or singular account with EQ or elsewhere. We have 2 EQ joint savings, each with different linked outside accounts - you see where I'm going with this setup if one dies while the GIC is outstanding.

Simply put, my view is clouded by an irrevocable (by the owner of the GIC, and EQ at the time the GIC is activated) deemed disposition location/beneficiary people, which is the joint account only.

My solution would be simple. Say nothing and let the GIC mature. However I'm going to "waste my time" and write EQ now and in the unlikely event I get some new information, I'll post it here.  

I hear what you are saying.
Why do you believe the GIC would automatically revert to the account from which it came on maturity? In my experience, the default position of most FIs is for auto-renewal. I have never heard of any irrevocable deemed disposition such as you describe, and it doesn't make sense to me that such would exist. Changing maturity instructions seems to be pretty common while the owner is alive.

If the survivor were to start messing around by not informing the FI of a death, they would be in legal jeopardy if anyone found out, I would think. If the will has any other beneficiaries, they will have to sign off that the executor has done their proper legal duty or else the executor's work will have to be reviewed by a judge ("passing of accounts").

Bottom line, seems to me, is that non-registered accounts don't have beneficiaries. If you try to designate one, they won't let you. That seems to me to be a clear message.

It will be interesting to hear what EQ says.