InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
McWilliams discusses her tenure at FDIC
On February 3, outgoing-FDIC Chairman Jelena McWilliams spoke at the Bipartisan Policy Center on both her tenure and technology’s role in facilitating a more inclusive financial system. In reflecting upon her time as Chairman, McWilliams opined that the “story of how financial regulators, central banks, and the global financial system responded to the pandemic is one of great success. Only three banks failed since the start of the pandemic, and none due to the pandemic itself.” She also pointed out that during the Covid-19 pandemic, the FDIC prioritized “improving supervision and resolution planning” and “the importance of strong capital levels,” particularly for large banks. McWilliams listed some of her accomplishments as Chairman, including “implement[ing] a recordkeeping rule,” “simplify[ng] the deposit insurance rules for trust accounts,” and “enhancing the FDIC’s readiness if it is ever called upon to resolve non-bank firms, such as central counterparties.” Central counterparties, McWilliams explained, play a critical role in the financial system as their clearing services are central to U.S. financial markets. McWilliams discussed the ways in which the FDIC enhanced competition, fostered innovation, and “supported third-party partnerships,” extolling these virtues as “the guiding principles of my chairmanship that helped forge the most vibrant financial market in the world.”
McWilliams also stated that a “key aspect of our pro-competition agenda” was to “moderniz[e] a broad range of our rules while maintaining our core safety and soundness focus.” In connection with “crypto assets,” McWilliams opined that her personal “view is that generally bank-issued stablecoins closely resemble digital representations of deposits.” She urged the FDIC to “to build off the work we have done and provide clarity to the public as soon as practicable, which could include promulgating amendments to the deposit insurance rules.” McWilliams said that she hopes regulators will be more welcoming of the “endless possibilities” that digital assets and blockchain technology have in enhancing the efficiency of payments.
Borrowers may request SBA loan review of partially forgiven PPP loans
On January 27, SBA issued Procedural Notice 5000-827666 outlining a new process for borrowers to request an SBA loan review of partially approved forgiveness decisions by their Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) lenders. Effective immediately, when a PPP lender receives a forgiveness remittance from SBA on a partial approval decision (including instances when the lender required a borrower to apply for forgiveness in an amount less than the full amount of the loan), the lender must inform the borrower that the borrower has 30 calendar days from receipt of the notification to seek an SBA loan review of the lender’s partial approval decision. The lender must then notify SBA within 5 calendar days of receiving the borrower’s timely request for review. If SBA selects the loan for review, the borrower must continue to make payments on the remaining balance. Additionally, SBA noted that borrowers should be aware that the agency “may determine that the borrower is entitled to forgiveness in an amount less than what the [l]ender decided (including zero if, for example, the borrower is determined to be ineligible for the PPP loan), an amount more than what the [l]ender decided, or the same amount as the [l]ender decided.” The SBA notice outlined details related to forgiveness payment remittances resulting from a partial approval loan review, and noted that SBA will provide lenders additional guidance through the platform, including step-by-step instructions. The notice expires January 1, 2023.
SBA rolls out small business cybersecurity pilot program
On January 21, the SBA announced $3 million in funding for the agency’s Cybersecurity for Small Business Pilot Program. The funding is intended to help state governments assist emerging small businesses develop their cybersecurity infrastructures to combat increasing and evolving threats. Applications will be accepted from January 26 through March 3. “Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, small businesses have adopted technology at high rates to survive, operate, and grow their businesses. As a result, cybersecurity has become increasingly important as now, more than ever before, small business owners face cyber risks and challenges that could disrupt their operations and competitive advantages. As we seek to build a stronger and more inclusive entrepreneurial ecosystem, we must innovate and provide resources to meet the evolving needs of the growing number of small businesses. With this new funding opportunity, the SBA intends on leveraging the strengths across our state governments, territories, and tribal governments to provide services to help small businesses get cyber ready and, in the process, fortify our nation’s supply chains,” SBA Administrator Isabella Casillas Guzman said in the announcement.
Supreme Court blocks OSHA mandate
On January 13, a divided U.S. Supreme Court issued an order blocking a Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule mandating that employers with 100 or more employees require employees to be fully vaccinated or be subject to a weekly Covid-19 test at their own expense. However, in a separate order the Court allowed a separate rule issued by the Department of Health and Human Services requiring Covid-19 vaccinations for health care workers (unless exempt for medical or religious reasons) at Medicare- and Medicaid-certified providers and suppliers to take effect.
In November, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a nationwide stay on the emergency temporary standard (ETS) that included the mandate to employers, describing enforcement of the ETS illegitimate and calling the OSHA rule “unlawful” and “likely unconstitutional.” (Covered by InfoBytes here.) However, last month, the 6th Circuit lifted the stay in a 2-1 ruling, stating that “[b]ased on [OSHA’s] language, structure and Congressional approval, OSHA has long asserted its authority to protect workers against infectious diseases.” (Covered by InfoBytes here.) The applicants, seeking emergency relief from the Court to reinstate the stay, argued that the rule exceeded OSHA’s statutory authority and is otherwise unlawful.
In agreeing that the applicants are likely to prevail, the Court majority granted the application for relief and stayed the OSHA rule pending disposition of the applicants’ petitions for review in the 6th Circuit, as well as disposition of any timely petitions for writs of certiorari. “Although Congress has indisputably given OSHA the power to regulate occupational dangers, it has not given that agency the power to regulate public health more broadly,” the majority wrote. Adding that the ETS is a “blunt instrument” that “draws no distinctions based on industry or risk of exposure to COVID-19,” the majority stated that the Occupational Safety and Health Act does not plainly authorize the rule.
The dissenting judges argued that the majority’s decision “stymies the Federal Government’s ability to counter the unparalleled threat that COVID–19 poses to our Nation’s workers. Acting outside of its competence and without legal basis, the Court displaces the judgments of the Government officials given the responsibility to respond to workplace health emergencies.”
With respect to the Department of Health and Human Services rule, the Government applied to stay injunctions issued by two district courts preventing the rule from taking effect. In granting the application and staying the injunctions, the majority of the Court found that one of the Department’s basic functions authorized by Congress “is to ensure that the healthcare providers who care for Medicare and Medicaid patients protect their patients’ health and safety,” concluding that “[h]ealthcare workers around the country are ordinarily required to be vaccinated for diseases” and that “addressing infection problems in Medicare and Medicaid facilities is what [the Secretary] does.”
In dissent, four justices argued that the efficacy or importance of Covid-19 vaccines was not at issue in assessing the injunctions, stating that the district court cases were about “whether [the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] has the statutory authority to force healthcare workers, by coercing their employers, to undergo a medical procedure they do not want and cannot undo,” and arguing that “the Government has not made a strong showing that Congress gave CMS that broad authority.”
FTC says robocall violations top consumers’ do-not-call complaints
On January 5, the FTC issued its National Do Not Call (DNC) Registry biennial report to Congress. According to the report, more than 244 million consumers have now placed their telephone numbers on the DNC Registry over the past two years. The report also highlighted that in FY 2021, the Commission received more than five million DNC complaints, the majority of which reported robocalls violations as opposed to live telemarketing. The FTC reported that the increased number of illegal telemarketing calls correlates with advancements in technology that make it easier for telemarketers to “spoof” the caller ID information accompanying a call. “[M]any telemarketers use automated dialing technology to make calls that deliver prerecorded messages (commonly referred to as ‘robocalls’), which allow violators to make very high volumes of illegal calls without significant expense,” the FTC said. Imposters posing as government representatives or legitimate business entities topped the complaint list, followed by calls related to warranties and protection plans, debt-reduction offers, and medical and prescription issues. Last month, in response to the consistently high level of impersonator scam complaints, the FTC issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking seeking comments on a wide-range of questions related to government and business impersonation fraud (covered by InfoBytes here). The FTC noted that these scammers are looking for information that can be used to commit identity theft or seek monetary payment and often request that funds be paid through wire transfer, gift cards, or cryptocurrency. Additionally, the FTC stated that since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic, it has received more than 18,000 Covid-related DNC complaints.
Treasury issues final rule supporting the Covid-19 response
On January 6, the U.S. Treasury Department issued the final rule for the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) program, which was established under the American Rescue Plan Act, and has delivered approximately $350 billion to state, local, and Tribal governments for Covid-19 pandemic relief. According to Treasury, the “SLFRF program ensures governments have the resources needed to respond to the pandemic, including providing health and vaccine services, supporting families and businesses struggling with the pandemic’s economic impacts, maintaining vital public services, and building a strong and equitable recovery.” Highlights of the final rule include providing additional clarity and flexibility for recipient governments by, among other things: (i) expanding the list of eligible uses for funds; (ii) increasing support for public sector hiring and capacity; (iii) streamlining options to provide premium pay for essential workers; and (iv) broadening eligible water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure projects. The rule is effective April 1, 2022.
The same day, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) announced that its efforts to spur mortgage servicers’ participation in the California Mortgage Relief Program, which is funded by Treasury under the American Rescue Plan Act, has “helped forge a national model to protect homeowners impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.” According to the announcement, among other things, DFPI “issued a historic reporting requirement for residential mortgage servicing licensees to report how they would be protecting homeowners through increased mortgage relief staffing, mitigation efforts such as repayment plans, and state and federal mortgage relief funding,” and “encouraged mortgage lenders and servicers to work with affected customers and communities to avoid foreclosures.”
VA extends suspension of certain property inspection requirements for Covid-19 forbearance cases
On December 21, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued Circular 26-21-27 to extend the suspension of certain inspection requirements for properties purchased with loans guaranteed by the VA where the borrower has been negatively impacted by Covid-19. In 2020, the VA temporarily suspended its requirement to conduct a property inspection before the 60th day of delinquency for borrowers whose loans are currently in forbearance and were current or had not reached the 60th day of delinquency when the borrower requested CARES Act forbearance. Circular 26-21-27 sunsets on October 1, 2022.
CFPB examines pandemic’s effects on consumer finances
On December 21, the CFPB released a data point report discussing the results of a Making Ends Meet survey, which examined consumers’ financial health during the Covid-19 pandemic. Using the results from the survey as well associated credit bureau data, the Bureau found that while consumers “were much more likely to face income drops during the pandemic,” their “financial well-being scores improved on average through the end of the survey period (February 2021).” The Bureau reported that this may be attributed to pandemic-assistance policies, including unemployment insurance and pandemic-specific loan and rent flexibilities, many of which have ended or will end soon. Among the report’s observations, the Bureau noted a pattern between credit card debt and credit card utilization rates, where “credit card debt increased and decreased as cash assistance policies started and stopped.” Additionally, with the exception of federal student loan borrowers who received an automatic zero-payment-due plan, the Bureau found that roughly “80 percent of consumers who received rent, mortgage, credit card, or other forbearance suffered a significant income drop.” Recognizing that these policies helped protect consumers impacted by pandemic, the Bureau cautioned that “their expiration may lead to increased consumer distress unless the economic recovery is strong and equitable enough to make up for the loss of protections.”
Education Dept. extends student loan moratorium
On December 22, the Department of Education announced a 90-day extended pause on student loan repayment, interest, and collections through May 1, 2022, which will allow the Biden Administration “to assess the impacts of the Omicron variant on student borrowers and provide additional time for borrowers to plan for the resumption of payments and reduce the risk of delinquency and defaults after restart.” As previously covered by InfoBytes, in August 2021, President Biden announced the extension of the moratorium on collecting student loans until January 31, 2022. According to the Department, the extended pause will assist 41 million borrowers in saving $5 billion per month and “[b]orrowers are encouraged to use the additional time to ensure their contact information is up to date and to consider enrolling in electronic debit and income-driven repayment plans to support a smooth transition to repayment.”
States say FHA must require servicers to comply with Covid-19 loss mitigation options
On December 21, a coalition of attorneys general from 20 states and the District of Columbia sent a letter to the FHA urging the agency to address mortgage servicers’ alleged failure to adequately implement Covid-19 recovery loss mitigation options for eligible borrowers. As previously covered by InfoBytes, FHA issued Mortgagee Letter 2021-18 in July, which required mortgage servicers to offer a zero-interest subordinate lien option to eligible homeowners who can resume their existing mortgage payments under the “COVID-19 Recovery Standalone Partial Claim” option. For borrowers that are unable to resume their monthly mortgage payments, FHA established the “COVID-19 Recovery Modification” option, which extended the term of a mortgage to 360 months at market rate and targeted a 25 percent principal and interest reduction for all eligible borrowers. At the time, FHA informed servicers that they could start offering the options as soon as operationally feasible but were required to use the new options within 90 days.
The AGs alleged in their letter that several servicers of FHA-insured loans are reportedly failing to adequately implement these Covid-19 relief programs, and are instead “routinely sending borrowers letters that fail to include the Covid-19 Recovery Modification as an available option, are requiring paperwork and imposing qualifications that are not necessary under the FHA’s guidelines, and are instructing borrowers during customer-service phone calls that this option does not exist.” The AGs expressed deep concerns over these reports and requested that FHA take immediate action to ensure that FHA’s loss mitigation options, including the Covid-19 Recovery Modification, are fully implemented, and that borrowers receive accurate, up-to-date information. The AGs asked that FHA-approved lenders and servicers be required to demonstrate that they are taking affirmative actions to implement these Covid-19 relief options and requested training for all customer service staff to ensure borrowers receive the necessary information.