InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Minnesota Commerce Department provides “work from home” guidance to regulated institutions
On March 17, the Minnesota Commerce Department issued guidance to mortgage originators and servicers outlining the process for temporarily or permanently closing branch offices in Minnesota. For permanent closures, a licensee should file a surrender through NMLS. For temporary closures, the licensee should notify the Department. In addition, if the licensee has individual MLOs working from a home office, they must not have consumers come to the unlicensed location, and the company’s data security standards should be maintained. No physical records should be maintained at the unlicensed location.
Similar “work from home” guidance was provided to industrial loan and thrift companies, licensed non-depository financial institutions, and regulated lenders.
Nevada regulator requests institutions to work with customers affected by Covid-19
On March 17, the Nevada Financial Institutions Division issued a letter requesting every licensee to develop a plan to outline efforts to “manage the current environment.” Efforts may include, among other things: waiving fees such as late fees, lowering interest rates, halting collection or repossession efforts, and offering payment accommodations such as forbearances to avoid delinquencies, repossessions, and negative credit reporting.
New York requires regulated institutions to submit Covid-19 response plans by April 9
The New York Department of Financial Services (DFS) has created a webpage providing information for industry and regulated entities.
On March 12, the New York Superintendent of Financial Services issued an order providing that regulated entities may temporarily relocate an authorized place of business and close any of their branch offices or locations if adversely affected by Covid-19 upon prompt written notice and compliance with the law, among other things.
On March 10, the New York State Department of Financial Services issued several industry letters related to the novel coronavirus known as “COVID-19.” Two of those letters require responses from New York regulated institutions no later than April 9, 2020. Responses must be submitted via e-mail to banking.covid19@dfs.ny.gov.
In one letter, the NYSDFS encourages New York licensed lenders, among others, to evaluate how they may assist businesses that have been adversely impacted by COVID-19. Specifically, it suggests that such lenders consider easing new loan terms and waiving late fees, among other measures. Further, the NYSDFS explains that reasonable and prudent efforts to provide assistance to affected businesses are “consistent with safe and sound banking practices as well as in the public interest.”
In another letter, the NYSDFS requires New York regulated institutions to provide a response on the institution’s plans to manage the potential financial risk stemming from COVID-19. According to the letter, the plans should include, at a minimum, an assessment of the following:
- Credit risk ratings of the customers, counterparties, and business sectors impacted by COVID-19.
- Credit exposure to customers, counterparties, and business sectors impacted by COVID-19 arising from lending, trading, investing, hedging, and other financial transactions, including any credit modifications, extensions, and restructurings (including capitalizations of interest).
- Scope and size of credits adversely impacted by COVID-19 that currently are in, or potentially may move to, non-performing/delinquent status, including consideration of stress testing and/or sensitivity analysis of loan portfolios and the adequacy of loan loss reserves.
- Valuation of assets and investments that may be, or have been, impacted by COVID-19.
- Overall impact of COVID-19 on earnings, profits, capital, and liquidity (including impact on loan-to-deposit ratio) of the institution.
- Reasonable and prudent steps to assist those adversely impacted by COVID-19 (such as those described in the letter referenced immediately below).
In a third letter, the NYSDFS requires New York regulated institutions to provide a response on the institution’s plans to manage the risk of disruptions to its services and operations caused by COVID-19. According to the letter, the plans should include, at a minimum, the following:
- Preventative measures tailored to the institution’s specific profile and operations to mitigate the risk of operational disruption, which should include identifying the impact on customers and counterparts.
- A documented strategy addressing the impact of the outbreak in stages, so that the institution’s efforts can be appropriately scaled, consistent with the effects of a particular stage of the outbreak, which includes an assessment of how quickly measures could be adopted and how long operations could be sustained under different stages of the outbreak.
- Assessment of all facilities (including alternative or back-up sites), systems, policies, and procedures necessary to continue critical operations and services if members of the staff are unavailable for long periods or are working off-site, including an assessment and testing as to whether large scale off-site working arrangements can be activated and maintained to ensure operational continuity. This would also include an assessment and testing of the capacity of the existing information technology and systems in light of a potential increased remote usage.
- An assessment of potential increased cyber-attacks and fraud.
- Employee protection strategies, critical to sustaining an adequate workforce during the outbreak, including employee awareness and steps employees can take to reduce the likelihood of contracting COVID-19.
- Assessment of the preparedness of critical outside-party service providers and suppliers.
- Development of a communication plan to effectively communicate with customers, counterparties, and the public, and to deliver important news and instructions to employees, along with establishing forums for questions to be asked and addressed.
- Testing the plan to ensure the plan policies, processes, and procedures are effective.
- Governance and oversight of the plan, including identifying the critical members of a response team, to ensure ongoing review and updates to the plan, including the tracking of relevant information from government sources and the institution’s own monitoring program.
DFS published a fourth industry letter to institutions engaged in virtual currency business activity setting forth guidance and a request for assurance to ensure that such regulated institutions have preparedness plans in place to address operational risk posed by Covid-19. In the guidance, DFS required every regulated institution to submit a response to DFS describing the plan of preparedness to manage the risk of disruption to its services and operations as soon as possible and no later than April 9, 2020 (30 days from the date of the guidance).
Mississippi banking regulator issues memorandum on pandemic preparedness
On March 14, the Mississippi Department of Banking and Consumer Finance (DBCF) issued a memorandum to remind licensees to review risk management plans, including business continuity and pandemic plans, to ensure continuity of services. In addition, the guidance recommends licensees to: work with consumers impacted by Covid-19, be prepared for disruptions to availability of key personnel, and notify DBCF of any issues relating to events caused by Covid-19.
West Virginia amends Safe Mortgage Licensing Act for MLOs
On March 5, the governor of West Virginia signed HB 4353, which, among other things, amends the state’s Safe Mortgage Licensing Act as it relates to the issuance of mortgage loan originator (MLO) licenses. HB 4353 creates “a rational nexus requirement between prior criminal conduct and initial licensure decision making,” to guide commissioners or commissions with licensing authority. The law also details the consideration of past criminal conduct in the initial licensing of an MLO and eliminates offenses of “moral turpitude” from disqualifying an applicant from receiving a license, provided the crime does not have a “rational nexus” to MLO licensure.
New provisions added to the license issuance section of the Safe Mortgage Licensing Act address disqualification from license issuance. Under the new law, the commissioner may not disqualify an applicant from initial licensure because of a prior criminal conviction unless the crime bears a rational nexus to MLO licensure, as determined by consideration of (i) the nature and seriousness of the crime; (ii) the passage of time since the commission of the crime; (iii) the “relationship of the crime to the ability, capacity, and fitness required to perform the duties and discharge the responsibilities of the profession or occupation”; and (iv) any evidence of the applicant’s rehabilitation. In addition, the law permits an individual with a criminal record who has not previously applied for licensure to “petition the commissioner at any time for a determination of whether the individual’s criminal record will disqualify the individual from obtaining a license.” The amendments take effect on May 19.
Idaho regulator issues “Work from Home” guidance
On March 12, the Idaho Department of Finance issued guidance to its licensees and registrants—including mortgage brokers/lenders, mortgage loan originators, regulated lenders, title lenders, payday lenders and collection agencies—permitting employees to work from home even where the residence is not a licensed branch. The Department stated it will not take action against a licensee or registrant so long as the licensable activities meet specified data security and privacy requirements, and the licensee or registrant avoids advertising the unlicensed address or phone number, meeting consumers at the residence, or otherwise holding out or suggesting that the residence is a licensed location. The guidance is effective until June 30.
Massachusetts DOB reminds licensees of requirement for pandemic planning
On March 11, the Massachusetts Division of Banks issued a reminder to licensees to have business continuity plans that address the circumstances of a pandemic outbreak. The Division further advised licensees that it does not require an MLO’s home to be licensed as a branch so long as they do not advertise it as an office or meet consumers there and that it would permit other licensees to work from home, if feasible, subject to the same requirements.
OCC proposes licensing policy changes
On March 5, the OCC announced a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) and request for comment on proposed amendments that would update and clarify certain licensing policies and procedures and would revise its rules in 12 CFR part 5 to eliminate unnecessary requirements. Proposed changes include, among other things (i) allowing national and federal savings associations to “follow the procedures applicable to state banks or state savings associations…for certain business combinations”; (ii) expanding operating subsidiary notice and expedited review processes to include activities that are substantively the same as activities previously approved by the OCC; (iii) allowing “non-controlling investments and pass-through investments” in non-OCC supervised entities; (iv) creating procedures for citizenship and residency waivers for national bank directors; (v) redefining “troubled condition” in relation to director and senior executive officer changes; and (vi) adding chief risk officer to the list of positions for which a bank in troubled condition must provide notice when making a personnel change. Comments must be received by May 4.
South Dakota amends real estate licensing provisions
On March 2, the South Dakota governor signed SB 28, which amends certain statutory provisions related to real estate licensing in the state. Among other things, SB 28 outlines reasons why an application for a license may be denied, including if an applicant “has been disciplined by a regulatory agency in relation to activities as a real estate salesperson or broker, broker associate, firm, appraiser, mortgage broker, or any other regulated licensee, including insurance, securities, law and commodities trading.” SB 28 also stipulates that the state’s real estate commission may issue restricted broker’s licenses, as well as administer and enforce outlined provisions. Licensure exemptions are also set forth. The amendments take effect July 1.
CSBS seeks additional comments on money services businesses model law
On February 25, the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) issued a second request for comments on its draft model law language for money services businesses (MSB Model Law)—a primary part of CSBS’s Vision 2020 initiatives, which are intended to modernize state regulation of non-banks and fintech firms. (Vision 2020 InfoBytes coverage is available here.) According to CSBS, the draft MSB Model Law is comprised of “an integrated, 50-state licensing and supervisory system that recognizes standards across state lines.” As previously covered by InfoBytes, last October CSBS requested comments on the draft MSB Model Law language focusing on issue areas identified by the Fintech Industry Advisory Panel—Control, Activity and Exemption Definitions, Safety & Soundness, and Supervision. To finalize the areas of control and supervision, CSBS is seeking a second round of comments by March 11 to address the following issues identified from comments received during the first round.
- The industry expressed implementation concerns, with several parties noting, “that CSBS has no authority to implement the MSB Model Law in individual states and utilizing NMLS to drive consistency could compound differences between states.”
- The proposed control language failed to address uncertainty over the identification of control persons. Moreover, “attempts to exclude passive investors [did] not achieve the intended results.”
- The industry strongly suggested that parity language contained in the draft MSB Model Law—designed to facilitate state adoption—“was overly broad and would create uncertainty if used.”
- Definitions and exemptions fell short on several critical issues.
- The existence of proponents and detractors of both the safety and soundness proposals signaled a divergence within the industry as to the appropriate safeguards for customer funds.
CSBS notes that the MSB Model Law language will help harmonize operations between states. After the comment period ends, CSBS will prioritize the MSB Model Law for release, with control and coordination language expected to be released in the second quarter of 2020, followed by activities and exemption definitions in May. CSBS also plans to work with states and the industry on safety and soundness language, which may be released as early as August.