InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
OCC, Federal Reserve Solicit Public Comments on Volcker Rule
On August 2, the OCC announced it is seeking public comments on ways to improve regulations implementing the Volcker Rule, however the agency stressed it is not seeking comment on changes to the underlying statute. The draft notice outlines issues with the rule, which bans banks from engaging in proprietary trading and restricts their ownership of certain funds, explaining that there is “broad recognition that the final rule [implementing the Volcker Rule] should be improved both in design and in application.” Referring to the Treasury Department’s June 2017 report, which identified problems with the design of the final rule and offered recommendations for revision, the OCC’s notice asked for suggestions on how to improve implementation with the understanding that any revisions would require a joint undertaking by the OCC, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the FDIC, and consultation with the SEC and the CFTC. Specifically, the notice seeks comments in the following four areas: (i) scope of entities subject to the final rule; (ii) proprietary trading prohibitions; (iii) covered fund prohibitions; and (iv) requirements for compliance program and metrics reporting.
Comments must be received within 45 days from publication in the Federal Register.
Separately, on August 2, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Fed) issued a notice seeking comment on whether to extend for three years the Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Disclosure Requirements Associated with Proprietary Trading and Certain Interests in and Relationships with Covered Funds (Regulation VV). Regulation VV imposes information reporting requirements on certain banks engaged in significant trading activities, to ensure compliance with the Volcker Rule. Among other things, the Fed invited comment on whether the proposed collection of information is necessary and has practical utility, and ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the collected information, while minimizing the burden on respondents. In its notice, the Fed stated that the information collection “is required in order for covered entities to obtain the benefit of engaging in certain types of proprietary trading or investing in, sponsoring, or having certain relationships with a hedge fund or private equity fund, under the restrictions set forth in [the Volcker Rule].”
Comments must be received by October 2, 2017.
OCC Files Motion to Dismiss CSBS Suit Over Fintech National Bank Charter
On July 28, the OCC filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to dismiss a lawsuit brought by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) challenging the OCC’s fintech charter. See Conf. of State Bank Supervisors v. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Case 1:17-cv-00763-JEB (D.D.C. Jul. 28, 2017). In a memorandum supporting its motion to dismiss, the OCC argued that CSBS does not have standing to bring the case because the OCC has not yet come to a decision on whether it will make special purpose national bank charters available to fintech companies and other nonbank firms, and therefore, “[n]o tangible effect on CSBS or CSBS's members could even arguably occur until a 5.20(e)(1) Charter has been issued to a specific applicant.” For similar reasons, the OCC argued that the case was not ripe for judicial review.
Addressing the merits, the OCC cited Independent Community Bankers Ass’n of South Dakota, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 820 F.2d 428 (D.C. Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1004 (1988), arguing that the ruling confirms its authority to issue special purpose bank charters and “illustrates that the legal concept of a special purpose national bank power is not novel or unprecedented, but rather follows a decades-old OCC practice.” The OCC further argued that under the National Bank Act, the OCC’s interpretation of “the business of banking”—in which a special purpose bank “must conduct at least one of the following three core banking functions: receiving deposits; paying checks; or lending money”—deserves Chevron deference.
As previously discussed in a Special Alert, CSBS claimed the fintech charter violates the National Bank Act, Administrative Procedure Act, and the U.S. Constitution, and that the OCC has acted beyond the legal limits of its authority. Furthermore, CSBS asserts that providing special purpose national bank charters to fintech companies “exposes taxpayers to the risk of inevitable [fintech] failures.”
However, shortly after the OCC’s motion was filed, a federal judge ordered that the OCC’s motion to dismiss be stricken based on excessive footnoting. The judge, in a minute order on the docket, cited that the excessive number of footnotes “appear[] to be an effort to circumvent page limitations.” On August 2, the OCC filed a renewed motion to dismiss.
OCC Requests Pre-Motion Conference to Discuss NYDFS Fintech Challenge
On July 25, acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Joon H. Kim, filed a letter with the federal court in that district on behalf of the OCC, requesting a pre-motion conference to discuss its anticipated motion to dismiss the New York Department of Financial Service’s (NYDFS) suit against the OCC’s special purpose fintech charter. See Vullo v. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Case 17-cv-03574 (S.D.N.Y., Jul. 25, 2017). As previously covered in InfoBytes, NYDFS filed the lawsuit May 12 on the grounds that the charter is unlawful and would grant preemptive powers over state law. Kim cites the following three reasons for dismissal of NYDFS’s complaint:
- NYDFS lacks standing to bring the suit because, although the OCC has “publically [sic] contemplated the possibility of issuing fintech charters…those public statements do not amount to a ‘final agency action’ subject to challenge under the [Administrative Procedure Act].” Indeed, since any harm NYDFS can identify is “conjectural or hypothetical,” and it has not suffered any “actual or imminent” injury, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
- OCC’s interpretation of its statutory authority under the National Bank Act (NBA) refers to Section 5.20(e)(1), which “reasonably limits the issuance of charters to institutions that carry on at least one of three ‘core banking activities’ [such as] the receipt of deposits, the payment of checks, or the lending of money.” Thus, regulations that allow chartering approvals—even if the chartered companies don't take deposits—is reasonable because they carry on at least one core banking function.
- The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution would protect fintech banks chartered under the relevant OCC rules and entitle them to NBA protections against state interference. Kim noted that it “is well established that the Supremacy Clause operates in concert with the NBA to displace state laws or state causes of action that conflict with federal law or that prevent or significantly interfere with national bank powers.”
The OCC faces a separate fintech lawsuit in the District Court for the District of Columbia brought by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors. (See previous Special Alert.)
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.”
OCC Acting Comptroller Reiterates Request for CFPB Arbitration Rule Data
On July 17, OCC Acting Comptroller Keith Noreika delivered a letter to the CFPB reiterating his request to review the supporting data used to develop the Bureau’s final arbitration rule prohibiting the use of mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses in certain contracts for consumer financial products and services. While the CFPB issued assurances that the final rule would not impact the safety or soundness of the financial banking system, Noreika argued that because the Bureau is not a “safety and soundness prudential regulator,” the OCC, as the prudential regulator for the federal banking system, should be allowed to review the underlying data to address potential concerns under Section 1023 in Title X of the Dodd-Frank Act. In response, CFPB Director Richard Cordray stated his team is in the process of gathering the requested data but questioned the “plausible basis” for Noreika’s claim that the final arbitration rule could pose a safety and soundness issue.
OCC Acting Comptroller Supports Fintech National Bank Charter
On July 19, Acting Comptroller of the Currency, Keith A. Noreika, spoke before the Exchequer Club about the proposed concept of granting special purpose charters for financial technology (fintech) companies. In prepared remarks, Acting Comptroller Noreika said the OCC has the authority to grant national bank charters to nondepository fintech companies in “appropriate circumstances.” However, he reiterated that having the authority does not imply a determination has been made as to whether the OCC will accept or grant applications from nondepository fintech companies that rely solely on regulation 12 CFR 5.20(e)(1), which outlines eligibility requirements for receiving special purpose national bank charters. To date, no such applications have been received.
The OCC continues to demonstrate its support for innovative developments and partnerships between banking and technology companies. As previously discussed in a Special Alert, the OCC issued a draft supplement in March to provide guidance for evaluating charter applications from fintech companies. “Providing a path for these companies to become national banks is pro-growth and in some ways can reduce regulatory burden for those companies,” Noreika remarked. However, the fintech special purpose national bank charter has recently met legal challenges from the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) and the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (see Special Alerts here and here). Norieka stated that the OCC is developing its response to the NYDFS lawsuit “and plans to defend [its] authority vigorously.” He cautioned against defining banking too narrowly, and argued that fintech companies should be allowed to apply for national bank charters if they meet the criteria and are involved in the “business of banking.”
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.
OCC Releases Spring 2017 Semiannual Risk Report
On July 7, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) announced the release of its Semiannual Risk Perspective for Spring 2017 indicating key risk areas for national banks and federal savings associations. Acting Comptroller of the Currency Keith Noreika pointed out in his remarks that, “[w]hile these are risks that the system faces as a whole, we note that the risks differ from bank to bank based on size, region, and business model. Compliance, governance, and operational risk issues remain leading risk issues for large banks while strategic, credit, and compliance risks remain the leading issues for midsize and community banks.”
The report details the four top risk areas:
- Elevated strategic risk—banks are expanding into new products and services as a result of fintech competition. According to the report, this competition is increasing potential risks. The OCC hopes to finish developing a special purpose banking charter for fintech companies soon.
- Increased compliance risk—banks must comply with anti-money laundering rules and the Bank Secrecy Act in addition to addressing increased cybersecurity challenges and new consumer protection laws.
- Upswing in credit risk—underwriting standards for commercial and retail loans have been relaxed as banks exhibit greater enthusiasm for risk and attempt to maintain loan market share as competition increases.
- Rise in operational risk—banks face increasingly complex cyber threats while relying on third-party service providers, which may be targets for hackers.
The report used data for the 12 months ending December 31, 2016.
OCC Issues Branch Closings Booklet, General Policies and Procedures Booklet
On June 29, the OCC issued Bulletin OCC 2017-24, announcing its revised Comptroller’s Licensing Manual booklet, “Branch Closings,” replacing the booklet issued in April 2003. According to the Bulletin, the revised booklet describes the 90-day advance notice to the OCC and branch customers that a bank must observe before closing a branch. It also explains the specific timing, procedures, and forms of notice the bank must supply. The booklet, which applies to all national banks and federal savings associations, summarizes the different notice requirements for each under Section 42 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act. It also lists steps for filing branch closing notices including: (i) sending advance notice to the OCC at least 90 days before closing; (ii) mailing notices to customers at least 90 days in advance; (iii) posting conspicuous notices at the branch at least 30 days in advance; and (iv) sending final closing notice to the OCC after the branch closes.
The notice requirement of Section 42 assists the OCC in assessing a bank’s record of opening and closing branches. The OCC reviews this record in examinations for compliance with Section 42 and in assessing performance under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The OCC, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) adopted a “Joint Policy Statement on Branch Closing Notices and Policies” (Joint Policy Statement) in June 1991 to provide guidance regarding the requirements of the branch closing statute.
On July 5, the OCC issued an additional bulletin, OCC Bulletin 2017-25, revising the “General Policies and Procedures” booklet of the Comptroller’s Licensing Manual issued in March 2008. This booklet explains how to file applications or notices with the OCC, requirements of the filings, and the OCC processes for licensing filings. The revised booklet applies to national banks, federal savings associations, and other entities that are involved in certain transactions including: (i) organizing a new bank; (ii) opening or closing a branch; (iii) establishing subsidiaries; (iv) some changes to capital or debt; and (v) certain other transactions. The booklet describes important policies and includes sample forms, filing requirements, and fees. It also covers the OCC’s review, approval or denial, and subsequent consummation requirements and appeal procedures.
OCC Issues New Comptroller’s Licensing Manual Booklet to Provide Guidance on Articles of Association Amendments, Charters, and Bylaws
On June 19, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) released Bulletin OCC 2017-23 announcing a new booklet designed to provide consolidated guidance on several policies and procedures impacting national banks and federal savings associations when forming the framework of articles of association or charter documents. The “Articles of Association, Charter, and Bylaw Amendments” booklet, which is a part of the Comptroller’s Licensing Manual, covers:
- regulatory requirements for articles of association, charters, and bylaws;
- an overview of the process required to notify the OCC or obtain OCC approval of an amendment;
- requirements for the content of the articles of association, charters, and bylaws;
- actions a national bank or federal savings association should take during the amendment process; and
- references and links to informational resources and sample documents that national banks or federal savings associations may use during the amendment process.