InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Counter ISIS Finance Group continues efforts to isolate ISIS from international financial system
On May 17, the U.S. Treasury Department announced the release of a joint statement by members of the Counter ISIS Finance Group (CIFG) of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, which coordinates efforts to isolate the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) from the international financial system and eliminate revenue sources. CIFG held its sixteenth meeting on May 9 to discuss ongoing efforts to combat ISIS financing worldwide. According to the statement, the Coalition is focusing “on disrupting international ISIS funds transfers and dismantling ISIS finance networks that support extremist activities, including terrorist attacks, militant recruitment, and promotion of violent ideology.”
During the meeting, participants discussed that, despite having access to at least 25 million U.S. dollars in reserves, ISIS Core in Syria and Iraq is struggling to meet its financial obligations, as its expenditures exceed its income. CIFG also noted that Africa has emerged as a center of gravity for ISIS, and “the branches and networks in Africa generally have precarious finances and typically rely on local fundraising schemes.” CIFG further stressed the importance to “remain vigilant” to “deepen our understanding of ISIS’s financial operations, emerging financial threats, and activities.”
Treasury says foreign financial institutions risk sanctions if they provide material support to Russia
On May 13, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Wally Adeyemo warned representatives from several foreign financial institutions about the risks of aiding Russia in evading sanctions imposed by the U.S. and its allies following the country’s invasion of Ukraine. Adeyemo emphasized that institutions may face “sanctions exposure for providing material support to a sanctioned entity,” and stressed that the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control “expects all financial institutions to do their own due diligence to ensure they are not transacting with a sanctioned person.”
Treasury issues 2022 national illicit finance strategy
On May 13, the U.S. Treasury Department issued the 2022 National Strategy for Combatting Terrorist and Other Illicit Financing (2022 Strategy). As required by federal law, the 2022 Strategy describes current U.S. government efforts to combat domestic and international illicit finance threats from terrorist financing, proliferation financing, and money laundering, and discusses potential risks, priorities and objectives, as well as areas for improvement. Among other things, the 2022 Strategy reflects challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic, the increasing digitization of financial services, and rising levels of corruption and fraud. Specifically, Treasury noted that 2022 risk assessments highlights threats “posed by the abuse of legal entities, the complicity of professionals that misuse their positions or businesses, small-sum funding of domestic violent extremism networks, the effective use of front and shell companies in proliferation finance, and the exploitation of the digital economy.”
According to Treasury, the 2022 Strategy, along with the agency’s 2022 National Money Laundering Risk Assessment (covered by InfoBytes here), “will assist financial institutions in assessing the illicit finance risk exposure of their businesses and support the construction and maintenance of a risk-based approach to countering illicit finance for government agencies and policymakers.”
Specifically, to protect the U.S. financial system from corruption and other illicit finance threats, the 2022 Strategy outlined four priorities and 14 supporting actions to address these threats. These include:
- closing legal and regulatory gaps in the U.S. anti-money laundering/counter the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) framework that are used to anonymously access the U.S. financial system through shell companies and all-cash real estate purchases;
- increasing the efficiency of the U.S. AML/CFT regulatory framework “by providing clear compliance guidance, sharing information appropriately, and fully funding supervision and enforcement”;
- enhancing the operational effectiveness of law enforcement, other U.S. government agencies, and international partnerships to prevent illicit actors from accessing safe havens; and
- enabling technological innovation while mitigating risk to stay ahead of new avenues for abuse through virtual assets and other new financial products, services, and activities.
The same day the U.S. and Mexico announced their commitment to establish a working group on anti-corruption, which will primarily focus on high-level strategic responses to public corruption. The announcement follows a recent agreement between delegates from the two countries to continue expanding information-sharing efforts to improve bilateral efforts for countering illicit finance.
Illinois amendments address confidentiality of customer financial records
On May 13, the Illinois governor signed SB 3971, which makes various amendments to Illinois Banking Act and Savings Bank Act provisions concerning the confidentiality of customer financial records. Among other things, the Act provides that a bank must disclose financial records “only after the bank sends a copy of the subpoena, summons, warrant, citation to discover assets, or court order,” to the person establishing the relationship with the bank if living (or the person’s representative otherwise), at the person’s last known address. Further, such requests must be sent through a third-party commercial carrier or courier, with delivery charge fully prepaid, by hand or by electronic delivery at an email address on file with the bank (provided the person has consented to electronic delivery).
The Act also stipulates that a bank retain customer financial records “in a manner consistent with prudent business practices and in accordance with this Act and applicable State or Federal laws, rules, and regulations.” A bank may also destroy records (with reasonable precautions taken to ensure the confidentiality of the information contained in the records) except where a retention period is required by law. The Act is effective immediately.
District Court grants final approval of a $500 million tribal lending settlement
On May 12, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted final approval of a nearly $500 million class action settlement resolving allegations that tribal online lending companies charged usurious interest rates. Plaintiffs’ filings outline their class action against tribal entities, as well as several of the entities’ non-tribal business partners (individual defendants), for making and collecting on high-interest loans.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit previously upheld a district court’s denial of defendants’ bid to dismiss or compel arbitration in the case (covered by InfoBytes here). The 4th Circuit concluded that the arbitration clauses in the loan agreements impermissibly forced borrowers to waive their federal substantive rights under federal consumer protection laws, and contained an unenforceable tribal choice-of-law provision because Virginia law caps general interest rates at 12 percent. As such, the appellate court stated that the entire arbitration provision was unenforceable. “The [t]ribal [l]enders drafted an invalid contract that strips borrowers of their substantive federal statutory rights,” the appellate court wrote. “[W]e cannot save that contract by revising it on appeal.”
The 4th Circuit also declined to extend tribal sovereign immunity to the tribal officials, determining that while “the tribe itself retains sovereign immunity, it cannot shroud its officials with immunity in federal court when those officials violate applicable state law.” The appellate court further noted that the “Supreme Court has explicitly blessed suits against tribal officials to enjoin violations of federal and state law.”
Following more than three years of litigation, the parties eventually reached a settlement that will include tribal officials canceling approximately $450 million in debt. As part of the settlement, the tribal officials will eliminate the balance on any outstanding loans on the basis that the debts are disputed, cease all collection activity, and will not sell, transfer, or assign any outstanding loans for collection. Tribal officials will also request deletion of any negative tradelines for loans in the name of tribal officials or tribal corporations, and will pay an additional $1 million to cover the costs of notice and administration for the settlement and $75,000 to go towards service awards. Additionally, the individual defendants will create a $39 million common fund that will go to class members who repaid unlawful amounts on their loans. Class counsel is also seeking attorneys’ fees and costs totaling around $13 million.
District Court says defendant’s request for default judgment was more than "procedural mishap"
On May 11, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky partially granted and partially denied a defendant collection attorney’s (defendant’s) motion to dismiss a FDCPA suit. According to the memorandum opinion and order, the plaintiff defaulted on a loan and the defendant was hired to file a collection lawsuit on behalf of the creditor. Though the plaintiff responded to the suit, the defendant filed a motion for default judgment and motion for attorney’s fees, which was not served for the plaintiff. The defendant attempted to have the plaintiff’s employer garnish his wages, but the plaintiff challenged the garnishment. After reviewing the case, the state court vacated the default judgment and ordered the sides to arbitration. The collection suit was ultimately dismissed with prejudice. The current stage of the suit involves the plaintiff suing the defendant, alleging he violated the FDCPA by improperly seeking default judgment, failing to serve the motion for default judgment, opposing his wage garnishment challenge, and requesting disingenuous attorney’s fees. The district court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss on the attorney’s fees and the provisions related to the wage garnishment. However, in respect to the allegations related to the filing for default judgment and failure to serve, the district court denied the motion to dismiss. The district court noted that the defendant’s “request for default judgment was more than ‘procedural mishap’—it was a ‘false, deceptive, or misleading representation [] in connection with the collection of any debt’ that seemingly caused faulty default judgment to be entered.”
Hsu urges banks to evaluate risk management exposures
On May 17, acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael J. Hsu stressed “[n]ow is the time for banks to take a fresh look at their exposures and take actions to adjust their risk positions—to ‘trim their sails,’ so to speak—ahead of potential uncertainty and volatility.” Hsu said banks should take action now to examine exposure and adjust risk profiles ahead of potential uncertainty and volatility in interest rates and loan performance. “Empowering risk managers and enforcing discipline in risk-taking will enable banks to better navigate the rate environment and will lower the chances of nasty surprises as quantitative tightening occurs,” Hsu stressed. Banks should also re-review their risk identification capabilities and assess the comprehensiveness of their counterparty credit risk management practices, paying close attention to areas where risk limits or other practices have been relaxed for “high-priority, high-growth clients, especially where increasing wallet share has been a goal.” He also cautioned banks against taking on too much risk associated with a single economic concentration, flagging commercial real estate and loans to non-depository financial institutions (including broker-dealers, asset managers, and investment funds) as specific areas where banks may suffer considerable losses when markets turn. Banks should also be careful not to relax underwriting standards, Hsu warned, pointing to some banks that have lowered their retail credit underwriting to obtain new customers and volume growth. “Actions today to defease high-impact tail risks can temper the need to go full ‘risk-off’ tomorrow, ensuring that the banking industry can remain a source of strength to the economy, as it has throughout the pandemic and recent market turbulence,” Hsu stated.
FDIC rule seeks to thwart misrepresentations about deposit insurance
On May 17, the FDIC approved a final rule implementing its authority to prohibit any person or organization from making misrepresentations about FDIC deposit insurance or misusing the FDIC’s name or logo. According to the FDIC, the final rule responds to the “increasing number of instances where individuals or entities have misused the FDIC’s name or logo, or have made false or misleading representations about deposit insurance.” To promote transparency on the FDIC’s processes for investigating and enforcing potential breaches of prohibitions under Section 18(a)(4) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the final rule clarifies the agency’s procedures for identifying, investigating, and where necessary, taking formal and informal action to address potential violations, and establishes a primary point-of-contact for receiving complaints and inquiries about potential misrepresentations regarding deposit insurance. The final rule takes effect 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.
In response, the CFPB released Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2022-02 to provide that covered firms are likely in violation of the CFPA’s prohibition on deceptive acts or practices “if they misuse the name or logo of the FDIC or engage in false advertising or make material misrepresentations to the public about deposit insurance, regardless of whether such conduct (including the misrepresentation of insured status) is engaged in knowingly.” As previously covered by InfoBytes, the newly introduced circulars serve as policy statements for other agencies with consumer financial protection responsibilities. Specifically, the Bureau warned that (i) “[m]isrepresenting the FDIC logo or name will typically be a material misrepresentation”; (ii) claiming “financial products or services are ‘regulated’ by the FDIC or ‘insured’ or ‘eligible for’ FDIC insurance are likely deceptive if those claims expressly or implicitly indicate that the product or service is FDIC-insured when that is not in fact the case” (e.g. emerging financial products and services including digital assets and crypto-assets); and (iii) misusing the FDIC’s name or logo creates harm for firms that engage in honest advertising and marketing. CFPB Director Rohit Chopra, as an FDIC board member, announced the Bureau’s support for the final rule. “Misrepresentation claims about deposit insurance are particularly relevant today,” Chopra noted. “FDIC staff has noted an uptick in potential violations in recent years. We are especially concerned about potential misconduct involving novel technologies, including so-called stablecoins and other crypto-assets. While new technologies may yield significant benefits for households, workers, and small businesses, they nonetheless pose risks to consumers who may be baited by misrepresentations or false advertisements about deposit insurance.”
Acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael J. Hsu specifically called out the timeliness of the final rule in light of changes in the marketplace, technological developments, and rapidly evolving consumer behaviors. The final rule “is especially important in light of the growth of nonbank crypto firms and fintechs and their relationships with banks,” Hsu stated. “The potential for consumer confusion about the status of cash held at these firms is high and this final rule will help provide clarity.”
CFPB seeks consistent enforcement of consumer financial law
On May 16, the CFPB launched a new system for providing transparent guidance on how the agency intends to administer and enforce federal consumer financial laws. Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2022-01 discusses the broad variety of agencies responsible for enforcing federal consumer financial law, including the CFPA’s prohibition on unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts or practices, and 18 other “enumerated consumer laws” (some of which provide for private enforcement). The circulars will serve as policy statements under the Administrative Procedure Act for other agencies with consumer financial protection responsibilities such as the FDIC, OCC, Federal Reserve Board, and NCUA. Because other federal agencies, including the DOJ, the FTC, the Farm Credit Administration, and the Departments of Transportation and Agriculture, also have certain enforcement responsibilities, the Bureau stressed the importance of ensuring entities subject to the jurisdiction of multiple agencies receive consistent expectations regardless of a company’s status. Specifically, the circulars “will provide background information about applicable law, articulate considerations relevant to the CFPB’s exercise of its authorities, and advise other parties with authority to enforce federal consumer financial law.” The Bureau announced it has identified several issues that would benefit from clear and consistent enforcement and strongly encouraged other agencies to reach out to the Bureau with suggestions for new circulars. Circulars will be authorized by CFPB Director Rohit Chopra and published on the Bureau’s website and in the Federal Register. The Bureau also welcomes feedback on any issued circulars.
White House plan aims to increase housing supply, ease housing costs
On May 16, President Biden released a plan intended to “help close” the housing supply gap and lower housing costs. The White House’s Housing Supply Action Plan is structured to ease the burden of housing costs over five years by increasing the supply of quality, affordable housing units in the next three years. “When aligned with other policies to reduce housing costs and ensure affordability, such as rental assistance and down payment assistance, closing the gap will mean more affordable rents and more attainable homeownership for Americans in every community,” the Administration said in a statement. “This is the most comprehensive all of government effort to close the housing supply shortfall in history.”
Under the Plan, the Administration would:
- Reward jurisdictions that have reformed zoning and land-use policies with higher scores in certain federal grant processes, including by immediately leveraging transportation funding to encourage state and local governments to boost housing supply (where consistent with current statutory requirements), integrating affordable housing into Department of Transportation programs, and including land use within the U.S. Economic Development Administration’s investment priorities. These actions build on strategies that the Administration has called on Congress to pass such as establishing a grant program to “help states and localities eliminate needless barriers to affordable housing production” and creating a mandatory spending proposal to provide billions of dollars in grants to reward states and localities that have taken action to reduce affordable housing barriers.
- Pilot new financing mechanisms for housing production and preservation where financing gaps currently exist. Immediate action will include supporting production and availability of manufactured housing (including with chattel loans that the majority of manufactured housing purchasers rely on), accessory dwelling units, 2-4 unit properties, and smaller multifamily buildings.
- Expand and improve existing forms of federal financing, including for affordable multifamily development and preservation. Immediate actions include strengthening Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac financing for multifamily development and rehabilitation by “making Construction to Permanent loans (where one loan finances the construction but is also a long-term mortgage) more widely available by exploring the feasibility of Fannie Mae purchase of these loans.” The Administration also plans to promote the use of state, local, and Tribal government American Rescue Plan recovery funds to increase affordable housing supply; finalize the Low Income Housing Tax Credit “Income Averaging” proposed rule, whereby developers commit to creating affordable housing for households that meet specific income thresholds; reauthorize and update guidance for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, which provides grants to states and localities that communities use to fund a range of housing activities; and improve “the alignment of federal funds to reduce transaction costs and duplications and accelerate development” by having the White House, HUD, Treasury, and USDA “convene state housing agencies to discuss best practices on the alignment of applications, reviews, and funding.”
- Preserve the availability of affordable single-family homes for owner-occupants by ensuring that more government-owned homes and other housing goes to owners who will live in them or mission-driven entities instead of large investors. The Administration will also encourage the use of CDBG for local acquisition and local sales to owner-occupants and mission-driven entities.
- Address supply chain disruptions by working with the private sector to address challenges. The Administration will also promote modular, panelized, and manufactured housing, as well as construction research and development to increase housing productivity and supply.
“Rising housing costs have burdened families of all incomes, with a particular impact on low- and moderate-income families, and people and communities of color,” the Administration stressed, noting that it has urged Congress to pass investments in housing production and preservation. The Administration’s 2023 budget includes investments that would lead to production or rehabilitation of another 500,000 homes.