InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Federal agencies will not recommend specific LIBOR replacement rate
On October 21, a group of U.S. financial agencies wrote to the executives of financial institutions that participated in the Credit Sensitivity Group workshops, stating that the agencies do not intend to recommend a specific credit-sensitive rate for use in commercial lending products in place of LIBOR. The letter states that “[t]he transition away from LIBOR is a significant and complex undertaking,” and there are multiple suitable alternative reference rates to replace LIBOR. The letter acknowledges that the use of the Secured Overnight Financial Rate (SOFR), which is recommended by the Alternative Reference Rates Committee is “voluntary.” After participating in the workshops, the agencies concluded that they are “not well positioned to adjudicate the selection of a reference rate between banks and their commercial customers” due to various business needs and terms of commercial loans that are based on the negotiation of banks and borrowing parties. Thus, the letter states, the agencies will continue to convene additional working sessions to highlight innovation in the credit-sensitive rates and explore implementing solutions for commercial loans transitioning away from LIBOR.
For continuing InfoBytes covering on the LIBOR transition see here.
Federal bank regulatory agencies release two final rules supporting large banks
On October 20, the Federal Reserve Board, OCC, and FDIC (collectively, “federal bank regulatory agencies”) finalized two rules for large banks.
The federal bank regulatory agencies first announced a final rule intended to reduce interconnectedness within the financial system between the largest banking organizations and to minimize systemic risks stemming from failure of these organizations. As the federal bank regulatory agencies noted in their announcement, the final rule, Regulatory Capital Treatment for Investments in Certain Unsecured Debt Instruments of Global Systemically Important U.S. Bank Holding Companies, Certain Intermediate Holding Companies, and Global Systemically Important Foreign Banking Organizations; Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity Requirements, “prescribes a more stringent regulatory capital treatment for holdings of [total loss-absorbing capacity] (TLAC) debt.” U.S. global systemically important banking organizations (GSIBs) will be required, among other things, to deduct from their regulatory capital certain investments in unsecured debt instruments issued by foreign or U.S. GSIBs in order to meet minimum TLAC requirements and long-term debt requirements, as applicable. The final rule recognizes the systemic risks posed by banking organizations’ investments in covered debt instruments and “create[s] an incentive for advanced approaches [for] banking organizations to limit their exposure to GSIBs.” The final rule takes effect April 1, 2021.
The federal bank regulatory agencies also announced a second final rule, Net Stable Funding Ratio: Liquidity Risk Measurement Standards and Disclosure Requirements, which will implement a stable funding requirement for certain large banking organizations established by a quantitative metric known as the net stable funding ratio (NSFR). The NSFR will measure banking organizations’ level of stability, and will require that a minimum level of stable funding be maintained over a one-year period. According to the federal bank regulatory agencies, the NSFR is intended “to reduce the likelihood that disruptions to a banking organization’s regular sources of funding will compromise its liquidity position,” and is designed to “promote effective liquidity risk management, and support the ability of banking organizations to provide financial intermediation to businesses and households across a range of market conditions.” The final rule “applies to certain large U.S. depository institution holding companies, depository institutions, and U.S. intermediate holding companies of foreign banking organizations, each with total consolidated assets of $100 billion or more, together with certain depository institution subsidiaries” with “increases in stringency based on risk-based measures of the top-tiered covered company.” The final rule takes effect July 1, 2021.
Agencies propose codifying that supervisory guidance lacks force of law
On October 20, the Federal Reserve Board, CFPB, FDIC, NCUA, and OCC released a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which seeks to codify the “Interagency Statement Clarifying the Role of Supervisory Guidance issued by the agencies on September 11, 2018 (2018 Statement).” As previously covered by InfoBytes, the 2018 Statement confirmed that supervisory guidance “does not have the force and effect of law, and [that] the agencies do not take enforcement actions based on supervisory guidance.” The Statement emphasized that the intention of supervisory guidance is to outline agencies’ expectations or priorities and highlighted specific policies and practices the agencies intend to take relating to supervisory guidance to further clarify the proper role of guidance, including: (i) not citing to “violations” of supervisory guidance; (ii) limiting the use of numerical thresholds or other “bright-line” requirements; (iii) limiting multiple issuances of guidance on the same topic; (iv) continuing to emphasize the role of supervisory guidance to examiners and to supervised institutions; and (v) encouraging supervised institutions to discuss supervisory guidance questions with their appropriate agency contact.
In addition to codifying the above elements of the 2018 Statement, the proposal would amend the 2018 Statement by (i) clarifying that references in the Statement limiting agency “criticisms” includes criticizing institutions “through the issuance of [matters requiring attention] MRAs and other supervisory criticisms, including those communicated through matters requiring board attention, documents of resolution, and supervisory recommendations”; and (ii) adding that supervisory criticisms should be “specific as to practices, operations, financial conditions, or other matters that could have a negative effect on the safety and soundness of the financial institution, could cause consumer harm, or could cause violations of laws, regulations, final agency orders, or other legally enforceable conditions.”
Comments are due 60 days after publication in the Federal Register, which has not yet occurred.
FDIC encourages investment in MDIs and CDFIs
On October 16, the FDIC published a resource guide titled, “Investing in the Future of Mission-Driven Banks,” which promotes private and philanthropic investment partnerships with FDIC-insured Minority Depository Institutions (MDIs) and Community Development Financial Institution banks (CDFI banks). According to the guide, there are nearly 250 MDIs and CDFI banks insured by the FDIC, which provide services to “minority, low- or moderate-income (LMI), and rural communities at higher rates than mainstream banks,” and have combined capital of less than $40 billion. The resource guide notes that equity capital investments increase banks’ lending by “multiple[s] of the original investment,” and in some instances, between eight and ten times the original investment. Lastly, certain investments may also qualify for matching funds in existing support programs, and partnerships between banks, private companies, and philanthropic organizations can expand the support.
FDIC provides relief from audit, reporting requirements triggered by stimulus-related asset growth
On October 20, the FDIC issued an interim final rule providing regulatory relief to insured depository institutions (IDIs) that have experienced significant, but temporary, asset growth due to government stimulus efforts. Previously, an IDI would be subject to annual independent audit and reporting requirements in any fiscal year in which its assets at the start of the year were $500 million or more. The interim rule permits IDIs to determine if they are subject to these requirements for fiscal years ending in 2021 based on their consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2019, or as of the beginning of their fiscal years ending in 2021, whichever is less. However, the rules also permit the FDIC to require IDIs to comply with the audit and reporting requirements if asset growth was related to a merger or acquisition. The rule will remain in effect through December 31, 2020, unless extended.
FinCEN, federal banking agencies provide CIP program relief
On October 9, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), in concurrence with the OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, and NCUA (collectively, “federal banking agencies”), issued an interagency order granting an exemption from the requirements of the customer identification program (CIP) rules for insurance premium finance loans extended by banks to all customers. The exemption is intended to facilitate insurance premium finance lending for the purchase of property and casualty insurance policies and will apply to loans extended by banks and their subsidiaries, subject to the federal banking agencies’ jurisdiction. According to FinCEN, insurance premium finance loans present a low risk for money laundering due to the purpose for which the loans are extended and the limitations on how such funds may be used. Moreover, FinCEN emphasized that “property and casualty insurance policies themselves are not an effective means for transferring illicit funds.” Banks, however, must still comply with all other regulatory requirements, including those implementing the Bank Secrecy Act that require the filing of suspicious activity reports. Furthermore, the federal banking agencies determined that the order is consistent with safe and sound banking practices. The order supersedes a September 2018 order, which previously granted an exemption from the CIP rule requirements for commercial customers (covered by InfoBytes here).
OCC, FDIC announce disaster relief guidance
On October 9, the FDIC issued FIL-96-2020 to provide regulatory relief to financial institutions and, starting on September 14, help facilitate recovery in areas of Florida affected by Hurricane Sally. The guidance notes that the FDIC will consider the unusual circumstances faced by institutions affected by the hurricane. The guidance suggests that institutions work with impacted borrowers to, among other things: (i) extend repayment terms; (ii) restructure existing loans; or (iii) ease terms for new loans to those affected by the severe weather, provided the measures are “done in a manner consistent with sound banking practices.” Additionally, the FDIC notes that institutions may receive Community Reinvestment Act consideration for community development loans, investments, and services in support of disaster recovery. The FDIC states it will also consider relief from certain reporting and publishing requirements.
Additionally, on October 8, the OCC issued a proclamation permitting OCC-regulated institutions, at their discretion, to close offices affected by Hurricane Delta “for as long as deemed necessary for bank operation or public safety.” The proclamation directs institutions to OCC Bulletin 2012-28 for further guidance on actions they should take in response to natural disasters and other emergency conditions. According to the 2012 Bulletin, only bank offices directly affected by potentially unsafe conditions should close, and institutions should make every effort to reopen as quickly as possible to address customers’ banking needs.
Find continuing InfoBytes coverage on disaster relief here.
Federal banking agencies amend capital rules to encourage support of recovery
On October 8, the OCC, FDIC and Federal Reserve Board finalized two rules intended to encourage depository institutions to utilize their capital buffers, which must be maintained in order to avoid having restrictions placed on capital distributions, for lending and other financial intermediation activities. The agencies amended rules governing risk-based capital and leverage ratio requirements for U.S. banking organizations, to make limitations on capital distributions more gradual in nature. The agencies also amended rules governing the total loss-absorption capacity of the largest U.S. bank holding companies and U.S. operations of the largest foreign banking organizations.
FDIC releases August enforcement actions
On September 25, the FDIC released a list of administrative enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in August. During the month, the FDIC issued 13 orders, consisting of “one consent order under 8(b), four orders of prohibition under 8(e), and eight Section 19 orders.” The consent order, issued against a Kansas-based bank, relates to alleged violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). Among other things, the bank was ordered to (i) terminate all activity related to its foreign financial institution customers, including such activity as funds transfers, remote deposit capture, money service business remittances, Automated Clearing House transfers, and funds transfers to or from any foreign central bank accounts; (ii) establish a directors’ BSA/anti-money laundering (AML) compliance committee; (iii) implement a revised BSA compliance program to address BSA/AML deficiencies, including incorporating internal controls to assure ongoing compliance, as well as training for appropriate personnel; (iv) maintain a BSA/AML internal control structure, including suspicious activity monitoring and reporting, risk assessment, and customer due diligence; (v) contract with a third-party consulting firm to conduct an independent test of the bank’s BSA/AML compliance program; (vi) implement an effective, comprehensive BSA training program for appropriate personnel regarding specific compliance responsibilities; and (vii) conduct a look-back review to ensure certain reportable transactions and suspicious activities were appropriately identified and reported.
FDIC announces disaster relief in connection with Hurricane Sally
On September 23, the FDIC issued FIL-92-2020 to provide regulatory relief to financial institutions and help facilitate recovery in areas of Alabama affected by Hurricane Sally starting on September 14. In the guidance, the FDIC notes that, in supervising institutions affected by the hurricane, the FDIC will consider the unusual circumstances those institutions face. The guidance suggests that institutions work with impacted borrowers to, among other things, (i) extend repayment terms; (ii) restructure existing loans; or (iii) ease terms for new loans to those affected by the severe weather, provided the measures are “done in a manner consistent with sound banking practices.” Additionally, the FDIC notes that institutions may receive Community Reinvestment Act consideration for community development loans, investments, and services in support of disaster recovery. The FDIC states it will also consider relief from certain reporting and publishing requirements.