InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Federal Reserve, FDIC, OCC release stress testing scenarios
On February 1, the Federal Reserve Board (Fed) published stress testing scenarios to be used when conducting the 2018 Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) evaluations and stress test exercises for large bank holding companies and large U.S. operations of foreign firms. Instructions for participating banks also were released. According to the Fed, in an effort designed to “support the transition to stress testing,” foreign banks will only be required to participate in a “simplified global market shock” portion of the CCAR evaluation. As previously covered in InfoBytes, last December the Fed issued a request for comments on three proposals designed to increase stress testing transparency and resiliency of large, complex banks. This included a proposal to publicly release, for the first time, information concerning the models and methodologies used during supervisory stress tests, including those applied in the CCAR. According to the Fed’s press release, the qualitative and quantitative evaluations will be used to evaluate a bank’s ability to survive in times of economic stress and are broken into three scenarios with varying degrees of stress: baseline, adverse and severely adverse. The Fed reminded participating banks that capital plan and stress testing submissions are due by April 5.
The same day, the OCC issued its own stress testing scenarios for required OCC-supervised institutions with more than $10 billion in assets, and on February 2, the OCC released a notice and request for comments (notice) on revised templates to be used for stress test exercises performed by covered institutions with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more. According to the notice, revisions would reduce the number of data items in the Supplemental Schedule by approximately half, and include (i) the elimination of two reporting schedules—the Regulatory Capital Transitions Schedule and the Retail Repurchase Exposures Schedule; (ii) the addition of new criteria for institutions subject to the global market shock evaluation; and (iii) clarification on how “Credit Loss Portion” and “Non-Credit Loss Portion” are reported in the summary schedule worksheets. Furthermore, under the revisions, savings associations would be eligible to use the simplified reporting requirements already available to other large, non-complex holding companies. The notice was published in the Federal Register on February 2 and comments are due by March 5.
Additionally, on February 6, the FDIC released economic scenarios developed in coordination with the Fed and the OCC for certain supervised financial institutions. According to the FDIC, the scenarios “include key variables that reflect economic activity, including unemployment, exchange rates, prices, income, interest rates, and other salient aspects of the economy and financial markets.”
Review procedures need enhancing according to GAO’s Regulatory Flexibility Act compliance report
On January 30, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its annual report on federal financial regulators’ compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). Specifically, the report assessed whether certain regulators adhered to the RFA when drafting and implementing regulations that may affect small entities. Such regulators include the Federal Reserve, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, CFPB, FDIC, OCC, and SEC (collectively, the "agencies"). Under the RFA, the agencies must either (i) certify that a rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, or (ii) perform a regulatory flexibility analysis to assess the rule’s impact on small entities and “consider alternatives that may minimize any significant economic impact of the rule.” The report disclosed issues related to certifications. Examples included (i) providing incomplete disclosures of data sources or methodologies of economic analysis and impact; (ii) failing to provide definitions for criteria used to determine a “substantial number” or a “significant economic impact”; and (iii) relying on alternative and potentially outdated definitions of small entities. Additionally, GAO noted that many regulators were unable to provide supporting documentation for their analyses. GAO presented 10 recommendations for enhancing compliance procedures, and stressed that regulators should “develop and implement specific policies and procedures for consistently complying with RFA requirements and related guidance for conducting RFA analyses.” Specific recommendations for each agency are located here.
Bank regulators share living will expectations with foreign banks operating in the U.S.
On January 29, the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC sent letters to 19 foreign banks operating in the United States to outline and clarify resolution plan expectations. According to a joint release issued by the regulators, Dodd-Frank-mandated resolution plans—commonly known as living wills—require certain foreign banks to detail strategic plans for their U.S. operations “for rapid and orderly resolution under bankruptcy” should the banks fail or fall under material financial distress. Requested in the letters, among other things, are specifics on resolution strategies, capital calculations, management of liquidity, stress testing, and organizational structures. Banks are required to submit 2018 resolution plans no later than December 31, 2018. Refer here to access a list of banks and letters.
Agencies offer CRA credit for certain disaster relief efforts
On January 25, the FDIC, OCC, and the Fed (collectively “Agencies”) issued an interagency statement on the availability of Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) credit for financial institution activities that “help revitalize or stabilize the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, which were designated as major disaster areas by the President because of Hurricane Maria.” Provided financial institutions continue to be responsive to the community needs of their own CRA assessment areas, the Agencies will now give “favorable consideration” to community development activities, such as assistance to displaced people, in the areas impacted by Hurricane Maria. The Agencies state that they may give higher consideration to activities aimed at assisting the low- and moderate-income affected areas but that general consideration will be given regardless of median or personal income.
Agencies adjust civil penalties for inflation
On January 12, the CFPB published a final rule adjusting upward the maximum amount of each civil penalty within their jurisdictions, as required by the Inflation Adjustment Act. As explained in the rule, the new maximum penalty amounts for 2018 are calculated by multiplying the corresponding 2017 penalty by a “cost-of-living adjustment” multiplier—which for 2018 has been set by the OMB at 1.02041—and then rounding to the nearest dollar. The new penalty amounts apply to civil penalties assessed after January 15, 2018.
In addition, the FDIC, the OCC, and the Federal Reserve recently issued similar Civil Penalty Inflation Adjustment notices.
FDIC releases winter 2017 Supervisory Insights
On January 10, the FDIC released its Winter 2017 Supervisory Insights (see FIL-5-2018), which contains articles discussing credit management information systems and underwriting trends. The first article, “Credit Management Information Systems: A Forward-Looking Approach,” discusses, among other things, how financial institutions can incorporate forward-looking metrics to assist in identifying future issues. The article also emphasizes the importance of effective risk management programs which contain policies and procedures that support strategic decision making by senior management and board members responsible for overseeing lending activities. The second article, “Underwriting Trends and Other Highlights from the FDIC’s Credit and Consumer Products/Services Survey,” shares the recent credit survey results from examinations of FDIC-supervised financial institutions. The survey indicates that risk may be increasing in the industry based on reports of credit concentrations, increases in potentially volatile funding sources, and more “out-of-area lending.” In addition, the winter issue includes an overview of recently released regulations and supervisory guidance in its Regulatory and Supervisory Roundup.
Agencies finalize plans to further streamline Call Reports
On January 3, the Federal Reserve Board, FDIC, and OCC (agencies)—as members of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC)—announced finalized plans to reduce data reporting requirements and other regulatory requirements associated with the Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income (Call Reports) for financial institutions. According to the FFIEC, after reviewing comments related to the joint June 2017 proposal, the finalized changes will include:
- Reducing or remove the reporting frequency for approximately seven percent of the data items required on the Call Report for small institutions, effective June 30, 2018; and
- Revising Call Report schedules to align with the changes in accounting for equity securities, effective March 21, 2018.
The FFIEC noted that the agencies will not proceed with their June 2017 proposal to revise the instructions for determining past due status.
In addition to the June 2017 proposal, previous requests for proposed burden-reducing Call Report revisions were submitted by the agencies in August 2016 and November 2017 (see InfoBytes’ coverage of the August request here and the November request here).
FDIC Fines Puerto Rican Bank for Flood Insurance Violations, Releases November Enforcement Actions
On December 29, the FDIC released a list of 29 administrative enforcement action orders taken against banks and individuals in November, as well as one termination order issued in October. The FDIC assessed a $153,000 civil money penalty against a Puerto Rican bank, citing 321 violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA) and the National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) for (i) failing to notify borrowers that they were required to purchase flood insurance; and (ii) failing to obtain flood insurance on a borrower’s behalf in a timely fashion for those borrowers who failed to obtain insurance within 45 days after receiving notification. A second civil money penalty was issued against an Ohio-based bank for allegedly engaging in a pattern of violating requirements under the FDPA and NFIA, including by failing to obtain flood insurance at the time of origination.
Also on the list are consent orders issued against two banks related to unsafe or unsound banking practices, four Section 19 orders allowing applicants to participate in the affairs of an insured depository institution after having demonstrated “satisfactory evidence of rehabilitation,” five terminations of consent orders, and two adjudicated decisions, among others.
There are no administrative hearings scheduled for January 2018. The FDIC database containing all 30 enforcement decisions and orders may be accessed here.
Agencies Release CRA Asset-Size Threshold Adjustments
On December 21, the Federal Reserve, the OCC, and the FDIC (collectively, the “Agencies”) jointly announced the adjusted thresholds for asset-size used to define “small” and “intermediate small” banks and savings associations under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). Effective January 1, 2018, a small bank or savings association will be defined as an institution that, as of December 31 of either of the past two calendar years, had assets of less than $1.252 billion. Additionally, an “intermediate small” bank or “intermediate small” savings association will be defined as an institution with at least $313 million and less than $1.252 billion in assets as of December 31 of either of the past two calendar years. The agencies published the annual adjustments in the Federal Register on December 27.
Financial Regulators Issue Joint Supervisory Guidance for Disaster Areas; VA Announces Wildfire Relief
On December 15, the FDIC, Fed, OCC, and NCUA issued Interagency Supervisory Examiner Guidance for Institutions Affect by a Major Disaster (Guidance). The Guidance provides information on assessing the financial condition of institutions affected by a “major disaster with individual assistance” as declared by the President. The Guidance also encourages institutions affected by such disasters to discuss relevant issues with their examiners and notes that the supervisory agencies will consider extending report filing deadlines and rescheduling exams. Additionally, the Guidance states that examiners should consider factors related to the disaster, such as asset losses and staffing issues, when assessing capital adequacy and management capability requirements. And when considering the supervisory response to an institution that receives a lower component or composite rating, the Guidance provides that examiners should recognize the extent to which any weaknesses are related to the major disaster.
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), on December 12, announced additional special relief following the California wildfires in Circular 26-17-42. The Circular encourages VA loan holders to extend forbearance to borrowers affected by the wildfires and VA loan servicers to continue solicitation of the VA Disaster Loan Modification program (as previously covered by InfoBytes here). Additionally, for affected borrowers and loans, the Circular suggests that loan holders follow the 90-day foreclosure moratorium and that servicers consider waiving late charges and suspending credit reporting. The Circular is effective until January 1, 2019.
Find continuing InfoBytes coverage on Disaster Relief here.