The depositors were bailed out. Also, I would say the banking sector as a whole was bailed out. Providing unlimited insurance is to SVB’s depositors allowed other banks to remain solvent, as did the Fed’s new lending programs.
I disagree with that characterization.
The FDIC refunds depositors using money (assessments) they collect from member banks. So in essence, unless the government does something special to inject funds directly into the FDIC, the remaining FDIC member banks would likely see their assessment rates go up to cover the costs of these bank failures.
From https://www.fdic.gov/news/speeches/2023/spmar2723.pdf:
> "any losses to the FDIC’s Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) as a result of uninsured deposit insurance coverage will be repaid by a special assessment on banks as required by law."
My point is that the FDIC refunding more than 250k wasn't a bailout of the banks because FDIC insured banks are the ones who fund the FDIC.
FDIC assessments and taxes are different. You can over-simplify mentally to a tax, but that doesn't make it true.
The FDIC runs more like an insurance provider than a run-of-the-mill government agency.
How is it a bailout to let them keep their money? At best its an "internal banking restructuring in favor of the depositors".