InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
New York Attorney General issues judgment against crypto-asset firm
On June 14, the New York Attorney General, Letitia James, announced a stipulation and consent to judgment against a crypto-asset company for allegedly misleading investors on the risks of its program. Under the order, the defendants agreed to distribute all digital assets through its platform as restitution on an in-kind, “coin-for-coin” basis, with distributions to be made in the same amount and types of crypto-assets loaned by the investors. The stipulation followed a May 20 settlement with the company worth $2 billion.
The defendants were permanently restrained and enjoined from engaging in any conduct under the Martin Act and Executive Law § 63(12), as well as offering a cryptocurrency lending product in New York State. However, the order specified that if future state or federal legislation permitted crypto lending in the state, the defendant may seek permission from the New York AG to lift the ban. The defendants further agreed to fully cooperate with the New York AG as it continued to investigate the matter. The order also required the defendants to disclose to consumers within thirty days of its execution that the defendant is not registered with the SEC or the CFTC, along with detailing risk factors, among other disclosure requirements. The defendants neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the complaint, aside from admitting to personal and subject matter jurisdiction.
NYDFS issues guidance insurers regarding discrimination in affordable housing market
On June 24, Gov. Kathy Hochul announced guidance issued by NYDFS in Circular Letter No. 6 (2024) informing insurers and related parties that, under the new Insurance Law § 3462, making coverage decisions based on a property’s status as an affordable housing development or on the amount or source of a tenant’s income will be prohibited. According to the Circular Letter, the recently enacted law came in response to a “hardening” insurance market that has resulted in increased premiums and reduced coverage options for affordable housing developments. Under the law, insurers cannot base decisions such as issuing, renewing, or increasing premiums for policies on whether a property was an affordable housing development or if tenants received government assistance. The guidance noted that “excess line insurers, and the New York Property Insurance Underwriting Association (NYPIUA) must comply with Insurance Law § 3462 and can no longer request information about government-subsidized housing units or tenants paying rent with housing assistance or use this information for underwriting purposes,” and were required to update their insurance applications and underwriting guidelines accordingly. If insurance rates were previously based on these factors, insurers must revise their rates and submit them to NYDFS.
New York Fed releases paper on nonbanks reliance on banks
On June 20, the New York Fed released an article highlighting a recent study that revealed nonbank financial institutions (NBFIs) growth was reliant on banks for funding and liquidity insurance. The article observed that while this relationship between banks and NBFIs may result in overall growth and a wider access to financial services, it could add risks seen during financial strains like the 2007-2008 financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic. In response to these stressful periods, NBFIs have turned to banks, and later government agencies, for liquidity. And because the asset holdings of banks and NBFIs have become similar, any forced asset sales by NBFIs could trigger a chain reaction leading to market disruptions. According to the authors of the study, a holistic approach to the bank-NBFI relationship will be necessary to manage systemic risk and maintain financial stability.
New York Fed risk head delivers speech on emergent risks in finance
On June 11, the New York Fed’s Chief Risk Officer and head of the risk group, Mihaela Nistor, delivered a speech on the evolving landscape of risk management and emphasized the complexities of modern risks within the financial system. Nistor highlighted an increase in new risks around the world, from geopolitical conflicts and economic uncertainties to cyber threats, data privacy issues, and disruptive technologies. She then categorized these risks internal or external threats.
Nistor first addressed the internal risk landscape within organizations and emphasized the need for organizations to develop a comprehensive view of risk within an enterprise, to identify priorities and allocate resources accordingly. The speech described the importance of building a strong risk culture within organizations to identify and mitigate risks proactively. One way to strengthen risk-management culture, according to Nistor, would be through a “portfolio view” that evaluated risks collectively across projects within an organization rather than in isolation. Nistor stated that this approach facilitated a better understanding of interdependencies and cumulative risk exposure. However, the remarks stress the importance of different management approaches that were tailored to allow flexibility to mitigate an identified risk.
For external risk, Nistor focused on the importance of building resilience within organizations. Nistor noted that while external threats are often unpredictable, an organization can build resilience to meet emerging external risks by identifying critical assets and processes and developing contingency plans.
New York Attorney General sues crypto companies, alleging billion-dollar pyramid scheme targeting immigrant communities
On June 6, New York Attorney General Letitia James announced legal actions against two companies (with the same founders) for allegedly participating in illegal pyramid schemes. The complaint alleged these schemes defrauded hundreds of thousands of investors, including more than 11,000 New Yorkers, out of more than a billion dollars in crypto-assets. The AG alleged that the companies’ activities specifically preyed upon immigrant communities, notably New Yorkers of Haitian descent, using prayer groups and digital communication channels like social media to make false promises of high returns.
According to the complaint, one of the companies offered fraudulent returns from mining cryptocurrency, but never delivered on the promised profits and bonuses, eventually collapsing in 2019. The complaint then alleged the promoters of the collapsed company founded a new company that also promised high returns and bonuses. According to the complaint, from 2019 to 2023, investors deposited more than $1 billion worth of cryptocurrency into the new company, yet a minuscule fraction (less than $26 million) was actually used for trading on the company’s platform before its collapse in May 2023.
The Attorney General’s legal action will seek a permanent ban on the company and the associated individuals from conducting any securities or commodities business within New York and disgorgement and damages for the victims.
NYDFS issues loss mitigation guidance for property insurance
On May 23, NYDFS issued Insurance Circular Letter No. 3 (2024) which encouraged all insurers – authorized to write property/casualty insurance in New York – to offer loss mitigation tools and services to the insured for free or at a reduced fee. Insurers are encouraged to offer devices like smart water monitors and provide discounts for the installation of loss prevention systems, such as smoke alarms and sprinkler systems. Additionally, the letter reminded insurers of their obligation to provide an actuarially appropriate reduction in rates for the installation of hurricane/storm shutters and hurricane-resistant windows and doors. It opined that any such tools or services offered by an insurer that are $25 or less in market value need not be specified in the insurance policy, while those exceeding $25 must be. This initiative, the letter stated, will aim to create a more affordable and resilient insurance market.
NYDFS releases its Cybersecurity Program Template
On May 13, NYDFS issued a guidance letter informing licensed entities about its Cybersecurity Program Template. NYDFS created the Template to help individual licensees and individually owned businesses licensed by NYDFS to develop a cybersecurity program as required by its cybersecurity regulation (23 NYCRR Part 500). The Template was prepared based on the version of the NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation in effect as of November 1, 2023 (covered by InfoBytes here). The template does not need to be submitted to NYDFS or any other state agencies for approval.
New York Fed reports on community development financial institutions
On May 8, the New York Fed released a report examining both the origination and sale of loans by community development financial institutions (CDFIs) and found that loans of both types more than doubled from 2018 to 2022. According to the report, in 2022, CDFIs originated $67 billion and sold $14 billion of loans, which was a major increase since 2018, where CDFIs originated $29 billion and sold $6 billion of loans. This doubling also contributed to some market concentration: The 10 most active CDFIs in 2022 originated over 25 percent of the total origination volume and 75 percent of the total sold loan volume. The report stressed “nearly all loan sales to Ginnie Mae and life insurance companies” were sold from the most active sellers.
On breakdown, the New York Fed found residential (single family) loans as the highest volume collateral data type, far outpacing lines of credit, multifamily, commercial real estate, and business. There were also a high number of CDFI originations in California and Florida, and credit unions were the most active originators over banks, thrifts, or loan funds.
On May 14, a member of the Fed Board of Governors Lisa Cook spoke on how CDFIs impact communities positively and some of the challenges CDFIs face. Cook noted specifically that CDFIs often “continue their work with borrowers even after loans are made… helping them through rough spots, should borrowers experience difficulty repaying loans,” which were unique among the CDFI borrower-banking relationship. On challenges, Cook noted how demand for capital was outpacing the current supply: Federal funding tied to past pandemic relief programs have dried up, leading to the challenge of building out long-term capital sources for future CDFI demand. She closed by emphasizing the importance of the CDFI industry and her continued support of CDFIs.
New York AG settles with bank over EIPA violations
On April 17, the New York attorney general (AG) announced a settlement with a bank (respondent) to resolve allegations that respondent improperly froze customer accounts and paid out consumer funds to debt collectors, and failed to properly oversee its service providers engaging in similar activity, in violation of the Exempt Income Protection Act (EIPA). The EIPA requires that banks, among other things, “not restrain consumers’ use of statutorily exempt funds, such as social security benefits, veterans benefits, and disability insurance… in consumers’ bank accounts up to an amount set every three years by New York’s Department of Financial Services.” New York law also bars debt collectors from acquiring funds that include certain government benefits.
According to the settlement, respondent typically employs the assistance of specific third-party servicer providers to market and deliver banking products like debit cards, prepaid cards, payroll cards, or gift cards to consumers while respondent holds the funds loaded onto those cards. Servicer providers administer the program and interact with consumers, including by clearing transactions through a network processor approved by respondent, and generally handling transaction disputes and preparing account statements, while respondent oversees and monitors the program and the service provider while retaining full control of the funds. The AG claimed that respondents failed to ensure its servicer providers complied with the EIPA, and that on numerous occasions, servicer providers allegedly froze accounts holding exempt funds or accounts with balances below legal thresholds, then paid debt collectors with the frozen funds under the instruction of respondent.
According to the AG, respondent’s servicer providers also engaged in deceptive acts and practices by allegedly falsely labeling legal processes as “court orders” instead of documents from debt collectors. Respondents also allegedly provided false information that account freezes could not be lifted even when account balances were below legal thresholds, and falsely claiming only debt collectors could release the freeze. Additionally, servicer providers allegedly directed consumers to debt collectors who often sought deals to release account freezes for a portion of the account balance, despite the freezes being void and subject to the protected wage threshold.
Under the terms of the settlement, respondent will refund $79,664 plus interest to approximately 88 New Yorkers whose funds were wrongfully turned over to debt collectors and amend its policies and procedures. Respondent must also pay a civil money penalty of $627,000, and comply with ongoing monitoring and compliance requirements.
Seventeen State Attorneys General comment on CFPB overdraft proposal
State attorneys general (AGs) from 17 states recently sent a letter to the CFPB endorsing its proposed rule to amend TILA. The 17 states included New York as principal, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington. As previously covered by InfoBytes, the proposed amendments would treat overdraft credits as loans, which would make them subject to consumer protections.
The AGs argued that the historical basis for excluding overdraft fees from TILA protections would be obsolete due to how the fees are assessed, the high fee amount, and the large number of overdraft transactions. The AGs wrote that closing the loophole would protect consumers by providing customers with disclosures so they can better understand the cost and enable them to comparison shop. The AGs supported a benchmark fee of $3, which is the lowest fee amount proposed by the CFPB, and argued that even a $6 fee would “undercount the volume of transactions generating a fee post-enactment” of the proposed rule. Finally, the AGs urged the CFPB to extend the proposed rule to both “very large financial institutions” (those with more than $10 billion in assets) and small financial institutions.