Opinion-What banks don’t tell you about your money

Banking is often described as the bloodstream of the economy, a system in which money flows quietly and continuously, moving from hand to hand, account to account, and sector to sector. Banks stand at the centre of this circulation. They store our salaries, safeguard our savings, process our payments, and finance entire industries and national development.
In theory, it is a mutual relationship; customers trust the bank with their money, and banks use that money to serve the public and support the economy. Yet the relationship is not always as transparent as it should be, which brings forward a simple question every customer has the right to ask; What are you doing with my money?
This question becomes more relevant when we consider the amount of personal information banks expect from customers. A customer earning RO 700 and depositing RO 10,000 in cash will immediately be asked by the teller, “What is the source of funds?” The question is valid and necessary for anti-money laundering regulations.
No rational customer should object to this, because protecting the banking system from illegal money is a responsibility shared by all of us. Banks perform KYC — Know Your Customer — to understand who their clients are and where the money comes from.
But an interesting thought arises when we reverse the situation. What if customers introduced their own version of KYC and called it KYB — Know Your Bank? What if a customer, upon opening an account, politely asked the bank; Who are your shareholders? How exactly did the bank generate RO 50 million or RO 100 million in profit this year? Where is the bank investing depositors’ money? Who sits at the top management, and what is their professional background?
Suddenly the transparency becomes one-sided. Banks expect it from customers but rarely offer the same level of clarity in return. This imbalance is also visible in the daily experiences of ordinary account holders.
Consider a customer whose salary of RO 1,200 is credited on the 23rd of every month. Out of this amount, RO 500 is allocated to his loan as an EMI. Logically, one might expect that the moment the salary is credited, the EMI portion is transferred directly to the loan.
But that is not what happens. Instead, the RO 500 is simply blocked, sitting in the account for nearly a week before the bank finally moves it to the loan. During these six or seven days, the money is neither with the customer nor with the loan account. It is in a temporary place where the customer never sees — the bank’s pool account.
This pool account is not an idle space. It is where banks gather countless small amounts just like this one — blocked EMIs, pending card payments, uncleared cheques, and other temporary holds.
Banks use these funds for overnight placements and short-term liquidity operations. Even a delay of a few days can generate income for the bank, and when multiplied across thousands of customers, the amount becomes significant. The bank benefits, while the customer believes the money is simply waiting for a routine process.
The question then is; Why should the EMI remain blocked for almost a week? Why not transfer it immediately? The honest answer is that immediate transfers would result in a loss of short-term interest for the bank.
This intentional delay raises eyebrows. Is this practice ethical? If customers delay payments, they face penalties and interest charges. Yet when banks delay, it is considered standard procedure.
Such practices reveal a deeper issue; the uneven transparency between banks and the customers they rely on. Customers are asked to declare every detail — the nature of their job, the source of their deposits, the purpose of every transfer.
Meanwhile, when customers seek similar answers from banks, the conversation becomes vague. Profit figures are announced publicly, but the mechanics behind them remain hidden behind financial language most people cannot interpret.
This is why the question “Where is my money?” may sound harsh but is fundamentally fair. Customers deposit their salaries, their savings, their hopes for the future, and trust that their funds will be handled ethically.
If banks expect honesty, they must also practice it. The modern banking relationship should be built on equal understanding, not one-sided investigation. Money may circulate endlessly through the system, but trust does not. Trust must be earned, and transparency is the bridge between banks and the people who keep them alive.

Mohammed Anwar Al BalushinThe author is with Middle East College