InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
OCC Updates Comptroller’s Licensing Manual Booklet to Provide Guidance on Failure Acquisitions
On August 3, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) released OCC Bulletin 2017-26 announcing a revised version of its “Failure Acquisitions” booklet designed to provide guidance on several policies and procedures impacting national banks and federal savings associations interested in acquiring a failed depository institution through the FDIC’s bidding process. The booklet, which is part of the Comptroller’s Licensing Manual, covers:
- an overview of the process banks must follow when submitting a purchase and assumption (P&A) application, which requires OCC approval before a bank can begin the FDIC bidding process;
- considerations undertaken by the OCC when reviewing a P&A application;
- a description of the process and elements of the application, including public notice and competitive factors, as well as legal and accounting standards; and
- references and links to informational resources.
FDIC Releases List of Enforcement Actions Taken Against Banks and Individuals in June 2017
On July 28, the FDIC released its list of 23 orders in administrative enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in June. Civil money penalties were assessed against two banks, including one citing violations of the National Flood Insurance Act for (i) failing to obtain flood insurance before loan origination, and (ii) failing to follow force placed flood insurance procedures.
Also on the list are 13 Section 19 orders allowing applicants to participate in the affairs of an insured depository institution and four orders for removal and prohibition for bank employees breaching fiduciary duties and participating in “unsafe or unsound banking practices” leading to financial losses.
There are no administrative hearings scheduled for August 2017.
FDIC Updates Supervisory Guidance on Risk Management Examination Policies
On July 26, the FDIC issued Financial Institution Letter FIL-31-2017 to announce updates to its Risk Management Manual of Examination Policies. The revisions, which incorporated guidance from the FDIC’s Board of Directors, updated the Report of Examination Instructions regarding matters requiring board attention and “deviations from the safety and soundness principles underlying statements of policy.” The revision also included updated instructions for examiners to use when complying with examination schedules. The letter applies to all FDIC-supervised financial institutions.
FDIC Updates Affordable Mortgage Lending Guide Part II
On July 26, the FDIC released an update to its Affordable Mortgage Lending Guide, Part II: State Housing Finance Agencies (Guide) and Quick Links: State Links for Housing Finance Agencies. The Guide provides information for community banks about the programs and products offered by each State Housing Finance Agency (HFAs), and discusses, among others things: (i) first-lien mortgage products; (ii) down payment and closing cost assistance; (iii) mortgage tax credit certificates; and (iv) mortgage lending homeownership education and counseling programs. Updates to the Guide include program updates to 40 out of the 54 HFAs and changes to the State HFA Product Matrix. A review of Part II, completed July 1, 2017, reflects the FDIC’s commitment to provide the most up-to-date borrower and loan criteria information available.
Regulators Coordinate Review of Volcker Rule Application to Foreign Funds
On July 21, five U.S. financial regulators announced that they would not take action against foreign banks for qualifying foreign excluded funds, subject to certain conditions, under the Volcker Rule for a period of one year as they review the treatment of these types of funds under current implementing regulations. The regulators, which include the Federal Reserve Board, FDIC, OCC, SEC, and Commodity Futures Trading Commission, issued a joint statement to address concerns raised as to whether certain foreign excluded funds may fall within the definition of “banking entity” under the Bank Holding Company Act and therefore be subject to the Volcker Rule.
“A number of foreign banking entities, foreign government officials, and other market participants have expressed concern about the possible unintended consequences and extraterritorial impact of the Volcker Rule and implementing regulations for certain foreign funds,” according to the joint statement. The regulators noted that the review will allow time to consider the appropriate course of action to address these concerns, including whether congressional action may be necessary.In addition, the regulators stressed that the joint statement “does not otherwise modify the rules implementing section 619 [of the Dodd-Frank Act] and is limited to certain foreign excluded funds that may be subject to the Volcker Rule and implementing regulations due to their relationships with or investments by foreign banking entities.”
Federal Banking Agencies Issue Proposed Rulemaking to Amend Appraisal Requirement Threshold for Commercial Real Estate Transactions
On July 19, the Federal Reserve Board, the FDIC, and the OCC issued a joint notice of proposed rulemaking to raise the threshold for commercial real estate transactions requiring an appraisal from $250,000 to $400,000 in an effort to reduce costs and streamline transactions. The proposal was issued, in part, in response to concerns raised by financial industry representatives during the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act review process that adjustments have not been made to the current thresholds despite increases in property values and a scarcity of appraisers in rural areas. FDIC Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg issued a statement announcing that the proposal will significantly reduce the number of transactions requiring an appraisal. Evaluations, rather than appraisals, would now be required for commercial real estate transactions at or below the proposed threshold.
Comments on the proposed rule will be accepted for 60 days from date of publication in the Federal Register.
FDIC Adopts Revised Supervisory Appeals Guidelines
On July 18, the FDIC adopted revised guidelines for appeals of certain material supervisory determinations to expand the circumstances under which banks may appeal a material supervisory determination. The revisions incorporate changes suggested by commentators during a request for comments in 2016. The revised guidelines also provide consistency with the appeals processes of other federal banking agencies and will, among other things, (i) permit the appeal of the level of compliance with an existing formal enforcement action; (ii) provide that formal enforcement-related actions or decisions do not affect a pending appeal; (iii) allow for additional opportunities for appeal rights available under the guidelines with respect to material supervisory determinations in certain circumstances; and (iv) draw up other limited technical and conforming amendments.
The guidelines are effective immediately.
FDIC Releases List of Enforcement Actions Taken Against Banks and Individuals in May 2017
On June 30, the FDIC released its list of 36 orders in administrative enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in May. Several of the orders on the list assess civil money penalties for violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Acts of 1973 and 1968 and their flood insurance requirements including: (i) failing to obtain flood insurance before loan origination; (ii) failure to maintain adequate insurance coverage on loans; (iii) failure to provide the required notification and failure to provide timely notification on loans; (iv) failing to maintain adequate flood insurance during the term of the loan; (v) allowing flood insurance to lapse during the term of the loan; and (vi) failing to provide written notice to the borrower concerning flood insurance before renewing a loan.
Also on the list are 14 assessments of civil money penalties, three of which are coupled with orders of restitution. Additionally, there are six orders for removal and prohibition for bank employees breaching fiduciary duties and using positions of control to “facilitate and conceal schemes perpetrated by Bank customers” that caused the bank to violate the Bank Secrecy Act.
There are no administrative hearings scheduled for July 2017.
Senate Banking Committee Seeks Perspectives of Midsized, Regional, and Large Institutions, Regulators on Economic Growth
On June 15, the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs (Committee) held a hearing entitled, “Fostering Economic Growth: Midsized, Regional and Large Institution Perspective”. This is the third in a series of hearings to address economic growth. Frequent topics of discussion in the hearing included stress testing and capital planning—specifically the Federal Reserve’s Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review stress test. Also discussed was the Systemically Important Financial Institution designation and costs incurred as a result, as well as the Volcker Rule.
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Chairman of the Committee, remarked in his opening statement that the current regulatory framework is “insufficiently tailored for many of the firms subject to it.”
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) – ranking member of the Committee—released an opening statement in which he stated “Let me be clear: proposals to weaken oversight of the biggest banks have no place in this committee’s process. . . Having said that, I am optimistic that there is room for agreement on a modified regime for overseeing regional banks.”
The June 15 hearing—a video of which can be accessed here—included testimony from the following witnesses:
- Mr. Harris Simmons, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Zions Bancorporation, on behalf of the Regional Bank Coalition (prepared statement)
- Mr. Greg Baer, President of The Clearing House Association (prepared statement)
- Mr. Robert Hill, Chief Executive Officer of South State Corporation, on behalf of the Midsize Bank Coalition of America (prepared statement)
- Ms. Saule Omarova, Professor of Law at Cornell University Law School (prepared statement)
On June 22, the Senate Banking Committee held another hearing entitled “Fostering Economic Growth: Regulator Perspective, the fourth in its series of hearings focusing on economic growth. The hearing is available via webcast here.
OCC, Fed Supervisory Guidance on Model Risk Management Followed by FDIC
On June 7, the FDIC issued Financial Institution Letter FIL-22-2017 announcing that, in order to provide consistency across institutions and agencies, it is adopting the 2011 model risk management supervisory guidance that was issued by the Federal Reserve (SR 11-7 ) and the OCC (OCC Bulletin 2011-12) thereby making the guidance applicable to certain FDIC-supervised institutions, namely those with $1 billion or more in total assets. The FDIC guidance defines the term “model” as “a quantitative method, system, or approach that applies statistical, economic, financial, or mathematical theories, techniques, and assumptions to process input data into quantitative estimates.” The FDIC indicated that banks’ heavy reliance on models in financial decision-making can come with costs, especially when the decisions are “based on models that are incorrect or misused.”
According to the FIL, the guidance contains “technical conforming changes” that make it relevant to institutions that are regulated by the FDIC, such as a “revised definition of 'banks' to reflect the FDIC's supervisory authority.”
Among other things, the FIL highlights that an effective model risk management framework should include the following:
- “disciplined and knowledgeable development that is well documented and conceptually sound”;
- “controls to ensure proper implementation”;
- “processes to ensure correct and appropriate use”;
- “effective validation processes”; and
- “strong governance, policies, and controls.”
For institutions with assets totaling less than $1 billion, the guidance will only apply in certain circumstances, such as when “the institution's model use is significant, complex, or poses elevated risk to the institution.”