InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Agencies address nonfinancial corporations’ LIBOR transition concerns
On August 23, the U.S. Treasury Department, Federal Reserve Board, SEC, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and CFTC released a letter responding to nonfinancial corporate stakeholders’ concerns as they prepare to transition from LIBOR to another reference rate. The agencies acknowledged that LIBOR’s cessation “presents considerable operational, technological, accounting, tax, and legal challenges for Main Street companies,” and recognized that “a smooth transition will be best supported if financial institutions offer alternatives to USD LIBOR that meet borrower needs and if this is done in a timely fashion.” The agencies further acknowledged challenges some stakeholders have faced when obtaining loan agreements based on the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR)—“even after they indicated that loan agreements based on SOFR would be their preferred choice”—and expressed concerns that nonfinancial corporations are not being offered such alternatives despite the short period of time before LIBOR’s cessation. Stressing the importance of using “reference rates built on deep, liquid markets that are not susceptible to manipulation” while also reiterating that “the official sector is not positioned to adjudicate the selection of reference rates between banks and their commercial customers,” the agencies stressed that “borrower preferences and needs clearly have a significant role to play in the selection of such rates.”
Find continuing InfoBytes coverage on LIBOR here.
CFPB releases TILA and CARD Act specifications
On August 20, the CFPB released new technical specifications regarding credit card agreement and data submission compliance requirements under TILA and the CARD Act (Regulation Z). Credit card issuers will utilize the Bureau’s website to submit: (i) Terms of Credit Card Plans (TCCP) Survey data (for the deadline of February 14, 2022); (ii) quarterly credit card agreement submissions (for the deadline of January 31, 2022); and (iii) annual reports connected to college credit card marketing agreements and data (for the deadline of March 31, 2022). According to the announcement, for the most recent TCCP Survey cycle that started on January 31, 83 percent of TCCP Survey submissions were made via the Bureau’s “Collect” website on a voluntary basis, which simplified the Survey submission process in a number of ways, including by minimizing confusing, irrelevant, or duplicative questions and providing an “audit trail” to track submissions. In addition, the Bureau understands Collect to be faster both for issuers and for Bureau processing, which “has led to the faster posting of the TCCP Survey results” and enhances the “public’s ability to use the data in a timely manner.” The Bureau believes that these benefits “would be increased if all TCCP Survey respondents used Collect, and that any additional burden on Survey respondents as a result of using Collect would be minimal.” As previously covered by InfoBytes, the CFPB released the final rule revising the dollar amounts for provisions implementing the TILA and amendments to TILA, including CARD Act, the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994, and Dodd-Frank’s ability-to-repay and qualified mortgage provisions. The recently released rule took effect upon publication in the Federal Register.
Education Dept. announces new TPD discharge measures for student borrowers
On August 19, the U.S. Department of Education announced that more than 323,000 student loan borrowers who have a total and permanent disability (TPD) will receive automatic discharges totaling over $5.8 billion. Under the final regulations, applicable borrowers will be identified through an existing data match with the Social Security Administration starting with the September quarterly match to allow “the Department to provide automatic TPD discharges for borrowers who are identified through administrative data matching by removing the requirement for these borrowers to fill out an application before receiving relief.” Borrowers matched with the Department of Veterans Affairs have already been able to take advantage of the TPD discharge data match since 2019. Two additional TPD-related policy items were also announced: (i) the Department will indefinitely extend a previously announced policy to stop asking borrowers to provide earnings information beyond the end of the national emergency (“a process that results in the reinstatement of loans if and when borrowers do not respond”); and (ii) the Department will propose eliminating the currently required three-year income monitoring period during a negotiated rulemaking that will begin in October.
CFPB releases HMDA data report
On August 19, the CFPB released a Data Point report titled, 2020 Mortgage Market Activity and Trends, which finds that the total number of closed-end originations, as well as applications, increased substantially between 2019 and 2020. The 2020 HMDA data encompasses the third year of data that incorporates amendments to HMDA by Dodd-Frank. The changes include new data points, revisions to some existing data points, and authorizing the CFPB to require new data points. As covered by a Buckley Special Alert, the CFPB issued a final rule that implemented significant changes that reflected the needs of homeowners and the evolution in the mortgage market.
According to the report, trends in mortgage applications and originations found in the 2020 HMDA data point include:
- 4,472 financial institutions reported at least one closed-end record in 2020, which is a decrease from 5,505 in 2019;
- “The number of home-purchase loans secured by site-built, one-to-four-family properties increased by about 387,000, whereas the number of refinance loans increased by 149.1 percent from 3.4 million in 2019 to 8.4 million in 2020”;
- In 2020, the number of open-end line-of-credit originations, besides reverse mortgages, fell by 16.6 percent to 869,000, from 1.04 million in 2019;
- “The share of loans secured by closed-end home-purchase loans for site-built, one-to-four-family, first lien, principal-residence properties for Black borrowers increased in 2020 and the share of refinance loans for Asian borrowers increased in 2020”; and
- In 2020, the refinance boom largely continued the trends since the second quarter of 2019.
According to CFPB Acting Director Dave Uejio, “initial observations about the nation’s mortgage market in 2020 are welcome news, with improvements in the overall volume of home-purchase and refinance loans compared to 2019.” He also noted that “Black and Hispanic borrowers continued to have fewer loans, [are] more likely to be denied than non-Hispanic White and Asian borrowers, and pay higher median interest rates and total loan costs. It is clear from that data that our economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic won’t be robust if it remains uneven for mortgage borrowers of color.”
FHFA proposes new GSE housing goals
On August 18, FHFA proposed new housing goals for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) for 2022 to 2024, which are intended to ensure the reasonable promotion of “equitable access to affordable housing that reaches low- and moderate-income families, minority communities, rural areas, and other underserved populations.” Specifically, FHFA proposes two new single-family home purchase subgoals, which will replace the current low-income areas subgoal. The first new subgoal targets minority communities to improve access to fair and sustainable mortgage financing in communities of color. According to FHFA’s announcement, mortgages will qualify under this subgoal if (i) “the borrower has an income at or below area median income (AMI)”; and (ii) “the property is in a census tract where the median income is below AMI and minorities make up at least 30 percent of the population.” Under the proposed rule, the first new subgoal would establish a benchmark level of 10 percent for GSE purchases of mortgage loans on properties in minority census tracts “made to borrowers with incomes no greater than 100 percent of AMI.” The second new subgoal targets low-income neighborhoods and would establish a benchmark level of 4 percent for GSE purchases of “mortgage loans on properties in low-income census tracts that are not minority census tracts,” in addition to “mortgage loans on properties in low-income census tracts that are minority census tracts, made to families with incomes greater than 100 percent of AMI.” Acting Director Sandra L. Thompson noted that the GSEs’ “housing goals over the next three years should support equitable access to sustainable affordable housing opportunities in a safe and sound manner that bolsters the health of communities.”
FHFA gives guidance on FHLB investments
On August 16, FHFA issued Advisory Bulletin AB 2021-02, which provides guidance regarding federal home loan banks’ investments in Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (CMBS) that are issued and guaranteed by either the U.S. government (Ginnie Mae), or by government-sponsored entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Bulletin recommends risk management practices, such as establishing certain limits to address the risks associated with unexpected prepayments of CMBS investments. FHFA also “encourages early adherence” to the guidance, but states that “by December 31, 2021, all Banks should have appropriate Agency CMBS concentration risk limits in place.” Guidance in the Bulletin includes, among other things: (i) pre-purchase analytics; (ii) the minimum risk-adjusted spread requirement; (iii) concentration limits; (iv) reporting; and (v) prepayment projections.
CFPB takes action against Maryland debt collectors
On August 16, the CFPB entered into a preliminary settlement with a debt collection entity, its subsidiaries, and their owner (collectively, “defendants”) for allegedly violating the FCRA, FDCPA, and the CFPA, resolving a case filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. As previously covered by InfoBytes, the complaint alleges that the defendants violated the FCRA and its implementing Regulation V by, among other things, failing to (i) establish or implement reasonable written policies and procedures to ensure accurate reporting to consumer-reporting agencies; (ii) incorporate appropriate guidelines for the handling of indirect disputes in its policies and procedures; (iii) conduct reasonable investigations and review relevant information when handling indirect disputes; and (iv) furnish information about accounts after receiving identity theft reports about such accounts without conducting an investigation into the accuracy of the information. The Bureau separately alleges that the violations of the FCRA and Regulation V constitute violations of the CFPA. Additionally, the Bureau alleges that the defendants violated the FDCPA by attempting to collect on debts without a reasonable basis to believe that consumers owed those debts. Under the terms of the proposed stipulated final judgment and order, the defendants are required to, among other things: (i) establish, modify, update, and implement policies and procedures on the accuracy of information furnished to consumer reporting agencies; (ii) establish internal controls to identify activities that may compromise the accuracy or integrity of information; (iii) establish an identity theft report review program; and (iv) retain an independent consultant to review the defendant’s furnishing of consumer information and debt collection activities in addition to provide recommendations. The proposed order also imposes a civil money penalty of $850,000.
FDIC seeks input on off-site examinations
On August 13, the FDIC issued a notice and request for information (RFI) seeking comments from financial institutions regarding the agency’s supervisory approach to examinations during the Covid-19 pandemic, including on-site and off-site activities, use of technology, and communication methods. Specifically, the RFI seeks input on areas that worked well in the off-site examination context “to inform plans for future examinations, consistent with applicable law and the purpose of examinations.” Areas of interest include identifying (i) examination activities that worked best or were most effective during the off-site approach; (ii) new or emerging technologies that would support additional off-site examination activities (the FDIC noted that leveraging technology has improved efficiency and reduced burdens on financial institutions); and (iii) what improvements, if any, could be made to communication methods used during off-site examinations, including whether the FDIC should continue to use secure mail as an alternative to hardcopy mail to communicate supervisory correspondence. Comments are due October 12.
DOJ, FTC comment on Fed’s proposed debit card interchange fees and routing changes
Recently, the DOJ and the FTC submitted comments on the Federal Reserve Board’s notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on debit card interchange fees and routing. As previously covered by InfoBytes, the Fed’s NPRM would require banks to ensure that two unaffiliated payment networks are available on their debit cards for online purchases. Among other things, the proposed amendments to the commentary to Regulation II, which implements Section 920 of the EFTA, (i) “clarify that the requirement that each debit card transaction must be able to be processed on at least two unaffiliated payment card networks applies to card-not-present transactions”; and (ii) clarify requirements imposed “on debit card issuers to ensure that at least two unaffiliated payment card networks have been enabled for debit card transactions.”
On August, 11, the DOJ’s Antitrust Division filed a comment in support of the NPRM, “commend[ing] the Board for its efforts to promote competition in this important part of the debit card industry by ensuring that smaller debit networks will have a greater ability to compete for merchants’ business.” While offering support for the NPRM, the DOJ asked the Fed to “consider whether the proposal is drafted broadly enough to capture all card-not-present transactions,” adding that “incumbent industry participants may attempt to circumvent the proposed rule.” The DOJ encouraged the Fed to “actively assess additional ways the proposed rule may be enhanced to increase competition for debit payment processing.”
Also on August 11, the FTC submitted a comment letter urging the Fed to clarify and strengthen the implementation of debit card fee and routing reforms, stressing that the Fed should “prohibit debit card networks from paying incentives to an issuer based on how electronic debit transactions are routed by merchants using that issuer’s debit cards.” According to the FTC, “[e]liminating routing-based incentive programs will make it less likely that issuers will search for ways to circumvent Regulation II, whether by violating the rule (necessitating an enforcement action) or by finding a loophole (necessitating future revisions to Regulation II).”
Fed announces flood insurance violations
On August 12, the Federal Reserve Board announced enforcement actions against two state banks. In the first consent order issued against a Massachusetts-based bank, the Fed alleged that the bank violated the National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) and Regulation H. The order assesses a $71,000 penalty against the bank for an alleged pattern or practice of violations of Regulation H but does not specify the number or the precise nature of the alleged violations.
In the second consent order issued against a New York-based bank, the Fed alleged that the bank violated the National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) and Regulation H. The order assesses a $11,000 penalty against the bank for an alleged pattern or practice of violations of Regulation H but does not specify the number or the precise nature of the alleged violations.