CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Negotiable order of withdrawal account

type of bank account

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionFeb 2, 2026
Entity authorityQ4045156 ↗
Source-derived summary

In the United States, a negotiable order of withdrawal account (NOW account) is an interest-paying deposit account on which an unlimited number of checks may be written.

A negotiable order of withdrawal is essentially identical to a check drawn on a demand deposit account, but US banking regulations define the terms "demand deposit account" and "negotiable order of withdrawal account" separately. Until July 2011, Regulation Q stated that a demand deposit could not pay interest. NOW accounts were structured to comply with Regulation Q.

NOW accounts are considered checkable deposits, and are counted in the Federal Reserve Board's M1 definition of the money supply, as well as in the broader definitions. Like all other bank deposits, they are liabilities from the bank's perspective.

History

The Banking Act of 1933 specified that no member bank "shall, directly or indirectly, by any device whatsoever, pay any interest on any deposit which is payable on demand", and on August 29, 1933, this restriction was incorporated into the Federal Reserve Board's new Regulation Q. The reason for the prohibition was that in a period of bank turmoil in the early years of the Great Depression, interest payments on demand deposits, especially by large New York banks, were viewed as "excessive competition" in the banking sector and supposedly led to diminished profit margins and hence bank failures, the latter because of both the diminished profit margins themselves and the resultant excessive stock market speculation by the New York banks.

At first, the general level of interest rates was low, and since the ban on demand deposit interest prevented only what would have been small interest payments, there was no significant attempt at avoiding the ban. In the 1950s, however, interest rates increased and so banks began to feel greater incentive to get around the ban. Non-pecuniary avoidance efforts included increased offering of convenience features such as large numbers of branch offices and giveaways of consumer goods to new customers. Pecuniary avoidance of the ban, known as implicit interest, included preferred loan rates (often explicitly tied to the customer's demand deposit balances) and below-cost service charges for services such as check-clearing.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Negotiable order of withdrawal account” as type of bank account. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2011, 1933—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Negotiable, order and withdrawal can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as type of bank account. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Feb 2, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q4045156. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2011 and 1933.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Negotiable order of withdrawal account”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Negotiable order of withdrawal account primary sources, Negotiable order of withdrawal account archive and Negotiable research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Negotiable order of withdrawal account”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Negotiable order of withdrawal account” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.