InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
OCC Names New Senior Leadership in Midsize and Community Bank Supervision
On May 2, the OCC announced the promotion of two long-time OCC employees to leadership roles within its Community Bank Supervision unit. Starting this May, Scott Schainost will serve as one of two deputies responsible for overseeing the supervision of midsize national banks and federal savings associations where he will oversee a portfolio of companies with assets generally ranging from $5 billion to $60 billion, as well as a number of nationally chartered institutions. This is a new position created to enhance the supervision of midsize banks. Schainost – who has held a variety of positions at the OCC during his 33 years at the agency – started his career as an Assistant Bank Examiner in Kansas City, before moving on to supervise banks of all sizes.
Beginning this June, Troy Thornton will serve as the head of one of the OCC’s four districts that make up community bank supervision, where he will oversee the supervision of more than 390 national banks, federal savings associations, and trust companies, while also overseeing 28 technology service providers spread over nine states from Texas to Florida. His responsibilities will include managing staff in 21 field and satellite offices throughout the district. Thornton began his career at the OCC 31 years ago as a Field Examiner in Texas. He is filling a vacancy left by Gilbert Barker’s retirement in November 2016.
CFPB Releases “Core Outcomes” for Financial Empowerment Programs
On April 27, the CFPB announced in a blog post its release of a core set of financial outcomes designed to help human services organizations integrate financial empowerment and capability initiatives into their programs. Strategies include implementing financial education tools and financial counseling or coaching. In its April report, Tracking Success in Financial Capability and Empowerment Programs, the Bureau identified the following five core outcomes to help consumers improve their financial capabilities: (i) planning and goals; (ii) savings; (iii) bill payment; (iv) credit profile; and (v) financial well-being. According to the report, which assists the financial empowerment field in encouraging commonality in outcomes, core outcomes are designed to:
- “help inform and guide service delivery organizations and those who design, fund, or evaluate service programs as they assess or document the value of integrating financial capability and empowerment strategies into the delivery of human services programs”;
- “provide a suggested core set of common outcomes to measure for the financial empowerment field”;
- “augment, not displace, current programmatic outcomes and accommodate a broad range of different program types”; and
- “help provide consistency across programs by creating a common framework and language for demonstrating success for the provision of financial empowerment services as an element of other human services programs.”
According to the Bureau’s Office of Financial Empowerment, it began identifying common core outcomes with input from multiple financial empowerment practitioners and researchers to “improve the financial well-being of “lower-income and economically vulnerable consumers.”
Treasury Announces FSOC Executive Session on May 8
Earlier this week, the Treasury Department announced that on Monday, May 8, Secretary Mnuchin will preside over an executive session of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC). According to a Treasury Department press release, the preliminary agenda includes:
- a discussion of the April 21 Presidential Memorandum on Council designations;
- an update on the annual reevaluation of the designation of a nonbank financial company;
- a discussion of interagency regulatory collaboration and the Feb. 3 Executive Order on core principles for financial regulation;
- a discussion of the FSOC’s 2017 Annual Report; and
- an update on bank holding companies’ living wills and resolution planning.
Consistent with FSOC’s transparency policy, the meeting may be made available via live webcast and/or can be viewed after it occurs. Meeting minutes for the most recent Council meeting are generally approved at the next Council meeting and posted online soon afterwards.
Meeting minutes for past Council meetings are available here.
Readouts for past Council meetings are available here.
Fannie Mae to Allow Home Owners to Swap Student Loan Debt for Mortgage Debt
On April 25, Fannie Mae issued updates to its Selling Guide allowing home owners to refinance their mortgages to pay off their student loan debt. The new policies will present opportunities for homeowners to (i) pay down student debt by refinancing their mortgage; (ii) no longer be required to include non-mortgage debt (credit cards, auto loans, and student loans) paid by others on loan applications; and (iii) increase the likelihood of qualifying for a mortgage loan while carrying student debt “by allowing lenders to accept student debt payments included on credit reports.” The updates also allow for debt to be excluded from the debt-to-income ratio if a lender can obtain documents showing that a non-mortgage debt has been paid by another party for at least 12 months. “These new policies provide . . . flexible payment solutions to future and current homeowners and, in turn, allow lenders to serve more borrowers,” stated Jonathan Lawless, Fannie Mae’s Vice President of Customer Solutions. The policy changes are effective immediately.
AG Sessions Discusses Approach to Enforcement at Annual Ethics Conference
In prepared remarks delivered April 24 at the Ethics and Compliance Initiative Annual Conference, Attorney General Jeff Sessions discussed the DOJ’s anticipated approach to prosecuting corporate fraud and misconduct under his leadership. The Attorney General announced the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) commitment to “re-double” its efforts to combat violent crime, while continuing to investigate and prosecute “corporate fraud and misconduct.” Specifically, Mr. Sessions pledged that the DOJ will “continue to emphasize the importance of holding individuals accountable for corporate misconduct” and when making charging decisions, will account for “whether companies have good compliance programs; whether they cooperate and self-disclose their wrongdoing; and whether they take suitable steps to remediate problems.”
Notable among the many points made by Mr. Sessions during his speech, was his emphasis on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”). As explained by Mr. Sessions, “corruption harms free competition, distorts prices, and often leads to substandard products and services coming into this country” and, ultimately, “increases the cost of doing business, and hurts honest companies that don’t pay these bribes.” To this end, the Attorney General promised to “strongly enforce the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws.” As he put it, “[c]ompanies should succeed because they provide superior products and services, not because they have paid off the right people.” In closing, the Attorney General took a moment to remind the audience that “[o]ur economy, and indeed, our whole system of self-government, depends on people believing that those who choose to disregard the law will be caught and punished. This is ultimately the responsibility of the Justice Department.”
FINRA Releases New Guidance on Rules Concerning Digital Communications
On April 25, FINRA issued new guidance on the application of its rules governing communications with the public concerning social media networking sites and online business communications. In 2010 and 2011, FINRA released Regulatory Notices 10-06 and 11-39 to provide initial guidance on these specific rules, and in 2013, “adopted amendments to Rule 2010 that codif[ied] guidance provided in the Notices with respect to the supervision of interactive social media posts by member firms.” In December 2014, FINRA issued its Respective Rule Review Report, which was designed to “assess whether the communications rules are meeting their intended investor protection objectives . . . and to take steps to maintain or improve the effectiveness of the rules.” FINRA Regulatory Notice 17-18 is the response to the report’s request for additional guidance and provides examples of how FINRA applies its rules to the following topics: text messaging, personal communications, hyperlinks and content sharing, native advertising, online testimonials and endorsements, correction of third-party content, and BrokerCheck. FINRA further notes that Regulatory Notice 17-18 is intended to deliver further guidance and does not alter principles previously provided in prior notices.
OFAC Updates: New Sanction Designations and Additions to Specially Designated Nationals List
In April, OFAC announced implementation of three new sanctions against several entities and individuals designated for, among others, materially assisting, sponsoring, or providing financial support to certain foreign entities. In addition, OFAC updated its list of Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) and Blocked Persons.
Libya-Based ISIS Financial Facilitators / Algerian ISIS Supporter and Arms Trafficker. On April 13, OFAC imposed sanctions against certain Libyan and Algerian financial facilitators for their roles in assisting ISIS’s financial operations in Libya. The designations block the individuals, one of whom was designated as engaging in actions through weapon trafficking, from the global financial system, and further state that “all property and interests in property . . . subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with” the identified individuals.
Syrian “Research Center” Accused of Developing Weapons. On April 24, OFAC announced it was taking action against 271 employees of a Syrian research center for “developing and producing non-conventional weapons and the means to deliver them.” The sanctions came as a reaction to the widely- reported April 4 sarin gas attack against civilians, and followed sanctions announced January 12 against 18 officials, five branches of the Syrian military, and associated entities for their participation in a chemical weapons program responsible for attacks in 2014 and 2015. The 271 named individuals are “designated for materially assisting, sponsoring, or providing financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of, and having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the Government of Syria.” The new sanctions block U.S. persons from dealing with these employees.
Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Sanctions. OFAC made additions to the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list, which designates individuals and companies who are prohibited from dealing with the U.S. and whose assets are blocked. Transactions are prohibited if they involve transferring, paying, exporting, or otherwise deal in the property or interest in property of an entity or individual on the SDN list. Additions to the list include Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Sanctions Regulations against two Mexican entities, and Global Terrorism Sanctions Regulations against a Saudi individual.
CFPB to Discuss Small Business Lending at May 10 Field Hearing
On May 10, the CFPB will hold a field hearing on small business lending in Los Angeles, CA. The announcement, which is posted on the Events page of the CFPB’s website, indicates that the hearing will feature “remarks from Director Cordray, as well as testimony from community groups, industry representatives, and members of the public.” Notably, “small business data collection” was among the topics covered by the Bureau in its latest fair lending report (See previous InfoBytes coverage here). Specifically, the CFPB noted in its report that Congress “expressed concern that women-owned and minority-owned businesses may experience discrimination when they apply for credit, and has required the CFPB to take steps to ensure their fair access to credit.” In response to this observation, the Bureau indicated in its report that its “[s]mall business lending supervisory activity will also help expand and enhance the Bureau’s knowledge in this area, including the credit process; existing data collection process; and the nature, extent, and management of fair lending risk.”
CFPB Draws Mixed Reactions in Response to Request for Comments on Proposed Student Lending Information Collection
Back in February, the CFPB proposed information collection on the student loan servicing market, since then two trade associations have submitted comment letters, one in support of the information collection and one believing that the information collection would be unduly burdensome. According to the Bureau, the proposed information collection was intended to provide the Bureau “with a broader and deeper look into the student loan market.” The comment period for its request closed earlier this month.
Americans for Financial Reform (AFR). On April 24, the AFR and 31 other organizations sent a sign-on letter to the CFPB expressing support for the CFPB’s proposed student loan servicing data collection initiative. The letter argues, among other things, that “compiling such metrics and borrower outcomes would benefit market participants, federal and state agencies, policymakers, and borrowers,” by allowing each to “[o]btain[] a clearer view of the student loan market overall” while also “inform[ing] all market participants on how best to serve student loan borrowers.” The AFR letter also offers several suggests as to how the Bureau can best ensure the “quality and transparency of the data.” The letter emphasized, among other things, that “transparency is critical to having a servicing system that works for borrowers,” especially given the large number of student loan defaults.
Consumer Bankers Association (CBA). In an April 24 comment letter, the CBA expressed agreement with the CFPB’s ultimate goal of creating a private student loan market that is both transparent and fair, but argues that its consumer bank members already “effectively tailor[]” their loan products “to meet their customer’s needs” and strive to make loans only “to customers who are judged highly likely to repay them.” Specifically, the CBA believes, among other things, that the CFPB information collection would require unnecessarily duplication of existing publicly reported private loan data. CBA also raised additional concerns, including: (i) whether the CFPB could collect the same data effectively, and with greater protection afforded to loan holders and servicers, through the supervisory process; (ii) whether the CFPB has “grossly underestimate[d]” the burden on servicers to collect the requested data, and (iii) whether the CFPB’s stated market monitoring objectives could be met through less burdensome methods.
OCC’s March Fintech Guidance Documents Draw Range of Comments, Reactions from Stakeholders
Back in December of last year, the OCC announced its intention to move forward with developing a special purpose national bank charter for financial technology (fintech) companies. In an accompanying white paper the OCC outlined the basis for its authority to grant such charters to fintech companies and potential minimum supervisory standards for successful fintech bank applicants. And, as previously covered by InfoBytes, in March, the OCC released a Draft Licensing Manual Supplement for Evaluating Charter Applications From Financial Technology Companies (“Draft Fintech Supplement”) and a Summary of Comments and Explanatory Statement (“March 2017 Guidance Summary”) (together, “March 2017 Guidance Documents”) in which it provided additional detail concerning application of its existing licensing standards, regulations, and policies to fintech companies applying for special purpose national bank charters. With the comment period for its March 2017 Guidance Documents closing earlier this month, the bank regulator drew a range of reactions from stakeholders, several of which are described below:
Center for Responsible Lending (CRL). In its comment letter—submitted on behalf of a number of consumer, civil rights, small business, and community groups—the CRL argued, among other things, that “the OCC does not have the legal authority to charter non-depositories,” and “is not a substitute for critical safeguards that exist at the state level,” and that the existence of a national bank charter for non-depository fintech institutions would likely result in the preemption of strong state laws. The signers expressed concern that, in its approval process, the OCC “has completely failed to address critical consumer and small business protection requirements.” The letter adds that the chartering process, as it now exists, “seems more designed to pick winners and losers and grant special privileges to established players in the industry than to facilitate innovation.”
Mercatus Center at George Mason University (Mercatus Center). In its comment letter, the Mercatus Center set forth its position and belief that the OCC’s current proposal “shows some improvement over its previous statements,” but “remains overly focused on the survival of the entity instead of the protection of customers.” According to Brian R. Knight, a Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center, the proposal imposes requirements and conditions on special purpose national banks (SPNBs) “that many will find impossible to meet—without a sufficient countervailing benefit.” Knight recommends therefore, that the OCC, among other things: (i) reorient charter requirements away from insisting that SPNBs demonstrate survivability and toward ensuring that they can fail in an orderly manner that protects their customers; and (ii) clarify the requirements for SPNBs to obtain and maintain a charter consistent with the rights and responsibilities of national banks under relevant law.
Consumer Bankers Association (CBA). In an April 14 comment letter, the CBA argued that the OCC "has not provided a clear rationale or justification for offering a national bank charter to fintech companies,” and that the standards for such banks are not yet fully developed.” The group urged the OCC to conduct an in-depth study of the fintech sector to determine whether or not the public would benefit from a fintech charter.
Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA). As previously covered by InfoBytes, the ICBA has been a vocal opponent of the OCC’s fintech charter efforts throughout the agency’s nearly yearlong process. Reiterating concerns raised in its January 17 comment letter, the ICBA submitted another comment letter on April 12, calling upon the OCC to rescind the proposed licensing manual supplement and request specific congressional authorization to grant fintech charters. Specifically, the ICBA asserted the need to spell out clearly the supervision and regulation that these chartered institutions and their parent companies would be subject to. The ICBA noted its observation that federal agencies “are inconsistent on how they define a ‘bank’ or what constitutes the ‘business of banking,’” and argued the benefits of giving Congress the “opportunity to define the business of banking and consider all the policy implications of issuing a fintech charter.” In particular, the ICBA insisted that the OCC publish liquidity and capital requirements for fintech firms that would be the same as those applied to depository institutions. The ICBA also issued a statement concerning a lawsuit filed April 26 by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors CSBS against the OCC (see related InfoBytes Special Alert), in which the organization “commend[ed] the CSBS for elevating this issue and remains deeply concerned with the OCC’s proposed fintech charter, which the agency has pursued without congressional authorization or a formal rulemaking process subject to public comment.”
American Bankers Association. In an April 14 letter, the ABA expressed its support for the OCC’s proposed charter, so long as “the same rules and oversight are applied consistent with those for any national bank.” The ABA emphasized, among other things, the benefit of a bank charter as a “clear signal to customers that they are dealing with a trusted partner,” as “[t]he title of ‘bank’ carries significant weight in the mind of customers and should not be taken lightly.”
Marketplace Lending Association (MLA). In its April 13 comment letter, the MLA called for the OCC to “consider developing metrics that are different from those used for traditional depository institutions.” Specifically, the MLA argues, “[i]instead of applying rigid capital and liquidity requirements across the board, the OCC should consider implementing requirements that are based on basic prudent operations, long-term profitability, and risk factors that would apply” to fintech firms with different business plans or structures.
Financial Innovation Now (FIN). Finally, in a letter sent earlier this month to the Senate Banking Committee (FIN)—an “alliance of leading innovators promoting policies that empower technology to make financial services more accessible, safe and affordable for everyone”—offered several policy recommendations in response to the legislators’ request for proposals to grow the economy. Among the recommendations offered, was a call for a “Financial Innovation National Strategy” to foster innovation, job creation, and competition in the financial services sector. As part of that strategy, the FIN letter outlines six policy proposals: (i) statutory designation of an Undersecretary of Treasury for Technology; (ii) federal money transmitter laws; (iii) payment technology assessments under the Card Act; (iv) consumer data access protections; (v) better federal regulatory coordination; and (vi) flexible approaches to new tech entrants.