PARK, Circuit Judge, concurring in the judgment (amended):

When people receive money by mistake, the law usually requires them to give it back. This commonsense rule allows transferors to reclaim property that rightfully belongs to them— whether misdirected funds, 1 an accidental overpayment, 2 or a credit to the wrong bank account. 3 An exception to the general rule can sometimes protect a recipient who was owed the mistakenly paid money. Under this narrow equitable defense, called “discharge for value,” a creditor who receives a payment in discharge of a debt he is owed can defeat restitution by invoking his own competing claim to the disputed funds. But here, Defendants had no such claim—not when they received Citibank’s money, and not when they were asked to give it back—because they were not entitled to payment for another three years after Citibank erroneously sent them half a billion dollars. Allowing them to keep that money would turn equity on its head and topple the settled expectations of participants in the multitrillion- dollar corporate-debt market. It would also be brutally unfair.

1 E.g., Home Sav. Bank v. Rolan