InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Banking Regulator Admits to Flaws in Supervision of Community Banking Sales Practices
On April 19, the OCC released a report detailing the results of an internal review that concedes the regulator’s oversight of a national bank’s consumer complaints and whistleblower cases was “untimely and ineffective” and that OCC supervisors missed or failed to address warning signs throughout the course of the bank regulator’s recent investigation. The objective of the internal review was to, among other things, “identify gaps in supervision,” and “[d]etermine if there are lessons learned that can result in improved supervision process.” The report—which was prepared by the OCC’s Office of Enterprise Governance (OEG) and the Ombudsman—concluded, among other things, that OCC supervisors had “focused too heavily on bank processes versus what those processes were actually reporting,” and notes that the OCC’s internal review “found no evidence that supervisory activities included in-depth review and testing of monitoring systems and controls” over incentives-based sales compensation or sales integrity. In addition to identifying “lessons learned” and “missed opportunities,” the report also sets forth general recommendations that it believes the OCC’s large bank supervision division should consider in order to improve their practices going forward, including that the regulator “[d]evelop an enterprise-wide whistleblower process and update external-facing interfaces . . . to inform the public or other governmental agencies how to communicate whistleblower information to the OCC,” and that it also “[e]nsure issues or concerns are followed through to effective corrective action.”
House Financial Services Committee to Discuss the “Financial CHOICE Act” at April 26 Hearing
On April 19, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) announced that the Committee will hold a hearing to discuss the Financial CHOICE Act next Wednesday, April 26. Touted as a potential replacement for the Dodd-Frank Act, the proposed new law—which stands for Creating Hope and Opportunity for Investors, Consumers and Entrepreneurs—was unveiled last June by Chairman Hensarling in a speech to the Economic Club of New York and was subsequently approved by the Committee last September. The hearing will focus on an updated discussion draft of the bill at next Wednesday’s hearing.
If enacted, the Financial CHOICE Act would, among other things, tailor a bank’s supervision to its risk profile/business model and provide for an independent exam appeals process, while also providing for and imposing more stringent penalties in cases of fraud or deception. Other provisions of the bill would repeal the Volcker Rule, strip the CFPB of its examination powers, and “UDAAP” enforcement authority and also discontinue small business loan data collection. And, finally, the Act would bring the CFPB, FDIC, OCC, FHFA, NCUA, and the Fed’s supervisory functions under the congressional appropriations process, thereby mandating a cost-benefit analysis and, in some cases, congressional approval prior to the release of any new regulations.
According to a press release from GOP Committee members, the proposed new law is based upon two central principles: (i) “all banks need to be well-capitalized” but (ii) “Dodd-Frank’s one-size-fits-all regulations . . . make[] no sense and hurt[] smaller, hometown banks and credit unions that did nothing to cause the last financial crisis.” To this end, the Financial CHOICE Act seeks to ease capital standards for community banks and credit unions that “elect to maintain enough capital to ensure that if they get in trouble, taxpayers won’t be forced to bail them out.” Meanwhile, offering a very different response to the release of an updated draft of the bill, Maxine Waters (D-CA), the Ranking Member of the Financial Services Committee, released a statement reiterating numerous objections to what she terms “the Wrong Choice Act.” Among other things, Rep. Waters argues that the proposed law “prioritize[s] the needs of Wall Street over the needs of hard-working Americans,” and “would take away much needed protections and put our economic security at risk.”
Dallas Fed Explores Reasons Why Community Banks are “Flipping to State Charters”
Released earlier this month, the latest issue of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas’ Quarterly Publication Financial Insights, takes a closer look at the causes behind a recent trend in community banks opting to change from a national to a state charter. As explained in the article—entitled Community Banks Flipping to State Charters—“[v]ery few commercial banks—only about 1 percent—change charters in any given year,” but, “of those that do change charters, twice as many are choosing a state charter.” Indeed, according to the authors, “[o]f the 780 community banks that changed charters between 1995 and 2015, 529 left the control of the [OCC].” Having analyzed data from the National Information Center (NIC), the authors conclude that motivations for changing to a state charter vary broadly “from cost to culture,” but that “[b]roadly speaking, charter choice is generally a question of whether the higher assessment cost often associated with a national charter is offset by the benefits of operating under a single set of laws and regulations.”
New York Fed Unveils Community Advisory Group to Offer “Views and Perspectives” Held by Local Community Stakeholders
On April 12, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (New York Fed) launched the “Community Advisory Group” (CAG)—a “private-sector advisory group,” that is composed of leaders from the non-profit sector and will meet at least three times a year to advise the New York Fed “on socio-economic and financial conditions faced by communities in the Second District” of the Federal Reserve System. According to the Community Advisory Group Charter, “[t]he primary goal of the Group is to present . . . views and perspectives on the economy and monetary policy held by individuals and households in a diverse set of communities.” The Charter also explains that the 10-15 Group members, selected by the New York Fed to serve a three year term, will be appointed “based on their ability to represent the views of one or more communities in the Second District.” The Group’s first meeting is scheduled for April 19.
HUD Issues Restated Consolidated Financial Statements for 2016 and 2015 Correcting $520 Billion in Errors
On March 1, HUD-OIG issued an Independent Auditor's Report (Auditor’s Report) (2017-FO-0005) on HUD’s fiscal years 2016 and 2015 (Restated) consolidated financial statements. The Auditor’s Report—issued in accordance with the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990—revealed, among other things, eleven “material weaknesses,” seven “significant deficiencies,” and five “instances of noncompliance” with applicable laws and regulations. Each of these findings related to what the auditor described as HUD’s “inability to establish a compliant control environment, implement adequate financial accounting systems, retain key financial staff, and identify appropriate accounting principles and policies.” The dollar amount of errors corrected in HUD’s 2016 and 2015 notes and consolidated financial statements were $516.4 billion and $3.4 billion, respectively. The Auditor’s Report further noted that there were several “unresolved audit matters,” which “restricted [the auditor’s] ability to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to express an opinion. Based on these observed issues, the Auditor’s Report recommended, among other things, that HUD (i) reassess its current consolidated financial statement and notes review process to ensure that sufficient internal controls are in place to prevent and detect errors; (ii) evaluate the current content of HUD’s consolidated note disclosures to ensure compliance with regulations and GAAP; and (iii) develop a plan to ensure that restatements are properly reflected in all notes impacted.
Testimony before the House Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development. On March 16, shortly after the Restated Financial Statements and Auditor’s Report were released, David A. Montoya, Inspector General of HUD, testified before the House Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies concerning, among other things, “HUD’s inability to maintain an effective financial management governance structure, which [the OIG has] reported on for the last 3 years and which contributed to [the OIG’s] issuing disclaimers of opinion as part of [their] annual audits of HUD’s financial statements.”
- A link to an archived webcast of Hearing can be accessed here.
- A copy of the Inspector General’s Testimony before the House Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development can be accessed here.
A copy of the Inspector General’s October 2016 Statement Summarizing the Major Management and Performance Challenges Facing HUD for Fiscal Year 2017 and Beyond can be found here.
Departing Federal Reserve Governor Offers Final Thoughts
On April 4, outgoing Federal Reserve Governor Daniel K. Tarullo presented his departing thoughts on the Fed’s response to the “worst recession since the Great Depression.” In his speech, Tarullo discussed the Fed’s initial post-crisis regulatory response and how it addressed the “too-big-to-fail” concept—positing that the “quick action in assessing the firms, recapitalizing them where needed, and sharing the results of the stress tests with the public stands as one of the turning points in the crisis.” On the subject of the Dodd-Frank Act, Tarullo noted that “partisan divisions” have prevented necessary substantive enhancements from being made, such as changing various thresholds to narrow the scope of strict prudential requirements and relieve the burdens placed on small community banks, and changing the Volcker Rule to make it less complicated. Tarullo summarized his position by stating that “[e]ight years at the Federal Reserve has only reinforced my belief that strong capital requirements are central to a safe and stable financial system” and that furthermore, “it is crucial that the strong capital regime be maintained, especially as it applies to the most systemically important banks. Neither regulators nor legislators should agree to changes that would effectively weaken that regime, whether directly or indirectly.” Tarullo’s last day at the Fed was April 5.
Legislation Proposed to Create Consistent Financial Data Reporting Standards Across Federal Agencies
On March 16, Congressmen Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Jared Polis (D-Colo.) introduced the Financial Transparency Act of 2017 (H.R. 1530), a bipartisan bill intended “to amend securities, commodities, and banking laws to make the information reported to financial regulatory agencies electronically searchable.” Specifically, H.R. 1530 would require the Treasury Department to disseminate data standards for all financial regulatory agencies, while directing each agency to transform its regulatory reporting regime from disconnected documents into standardized, searchable data. The bill further provides that any information required by other laws to be public must be published as open data, and includes specific directives for the SEC to improve that agency’s existing data reporting regime.
Additional details concerning the proposed measure are explained in a summary prepared by www.datacoalition.org. U.S. Representative Randy Hultgren (R-IL)—one of the bill’s co-sponsors and current Vice Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Securities and Investment—has also promoted the legislation in an op-ed for The Guardian, entitled How to stop the next Bernie Madoff.
Federal Reserve System Releases Audited Financial Statements for 2015 and 2016
On March 24, the Federal Reserve System released the 2015–2016 combined annual audited financial statements for the Reserve Banks and Board of Governors (Board) for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2016 (27-FMIC-B-002). The report—conducted by an independent auditing firm and reviewed by the Office of Inspector General—issues unqualified opinions on the Reserve Banks’ and Board’s financial statements and internal controls over financial reporting. According to the Federal Reserve System, the financial statements “provide a significant amount of information about the assets, liabilities, and earnings of the Reserve Banks and the Board as of December 31, 2016, including information about the composition, fair value, and earnings related to the $4.4 trillion of U.S. Treasury securities, government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) debt securities, and federal agency and GSE mortgage-backed securities (MBS) acquired through open market operations.”
Some of the highlights include:
- 2016 earnings for the Reserve Banks were approximately $92 billion;
- Reserve Banks provided payments of $91.5 billion to the U.S. Treasury in 2016;
- Reserve Banks’ interest income on securities acquired through open market operations totaled $111.1 billion, a decrease of $2.5 billion when compared to 2015 results, and attributable to “changes in the composition of securities held in the Federal Reserve System Open Market Account”;
- Interest expense on depository institutions’ reserve balances and term deposits during 2016 was $12 billion, an increase of $5.1 billion from 2015;
- Interest expense on securities sold under agreements to repurchase was $1.1 billion in 2016, an increase of $874 million when compared to the prior year; and
- Reserve Bank operating expenses for 2016 were $6.7 billion, which includes assessments of $2 billion for Board expenses, currency costs, and the operations of the CFPB.
House Financial Services Committee Chairman Issues New Subpoena to CFPB
On April 4, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling issued a new subpoena to the CFPB, giving the Bureau a May 2 deadline to comply with its request for documents, which related to auto lending, payday lenders, and investigations into a company that allegedly charged higher interest rates to minorities on auto loans, as well as a national bank allegedly involved in the improper sales practice of creating deposit and credit card accounts without consumer consent. The subpoena also repeats some requests made by the Committee in previous subpoenas as a response to the Bureau’s failure to perform its legal obligations to produce the requested documents. As outlined in Schedule A’s second item of the April 4 subpoena, the Committee requests “all records relating to any instance whatsoever, from January 4, 2012 – present, in which any CFPB employee directed another federal government employee not to transmit to any Member, Committee, or Subcommittee of Congress records requested or subpoenaed by any Member, Committee, or Subcommittee of Congress.”
As previously covered in InfoBytes, over the past 17 months, GOP members of the Committee, who believe that the CFPB likely has and continues to violate the Administrative Procedure Act, have issued three investigative reports based on internal CFPB documents obtained by the Committee.
Supporting America’s Innovators Act of 2017 Passes in House Vote
On April 6, a bipartisan bill entitled, Supporting America’s Innovators Act of 2017 (H.R. 1219) was received in the Senate after passing through the House by a 417-3 margin. The securities-related bill – which is now pending before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, amends the provisions of the Investment Company Act of 1940 that require venture capital funds with more than 100 investors to register with the SEC. As previously reported in InfoBytes, the bill would serve to raise the cap on the number of investors from 100 to 250, thereby facilitating greater access to venture capital funding for small businesses and startups. In a press release issued by the House Financial Services Committee, the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Patrick McHenry explains that H.R. 1219 is intended to, among other things, “address the challenges facing angel investing so that startups and small businesses can have better access to capital,” by “creating a regulatory framework that encourages innovation and growth, while ensuring that shareholder and investor protections remain strong.”