I suppose it depends on where you live. In Denmark when some of our banks failed in 2007-2008 the government simply assumed ownership of the banking operation u

I suppose it depends on where you live. In Denmark when some of our banks failed in 2007-2008 the government simply assumed ownership of the banking operation until the healthy business (regular people) could be sold and transferred to other banks. I think something similar happened with Silicon Valley bank, didn’t it? It’s typically not too disruptive for regular people. For investors, institutional loaners and people who have more money than what is covered by your country’s laws or the banks insurance, you will likely have to wait for a lengthy bankruptcy process to see what remains of your money beyond what is covered. Typically in-loans will be quite high on the bankruptcy priority list, but sometimes there won’t be enough money to cover much of it. Often there will also be various lawsuits in the wake of a bank failing, as investors try to get what they can. Where it can be severely disruptive is if your company has money in the bank exceeding the “regular people” amount. Because that would mean your company would have to wait for the bankruptcy process to obtain access to its funds.