InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
OCC, Federal Reserve Issue Flood Insurance Violations; Reauthorization of National Flood Insurance Program Discussions Continue
During the month of May, the OCC and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (Board) took action against certain banks for violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA) and National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA). Concurrently, House Financial Services Subcommittee Republicans circulated a package of draft legislation to reform and reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which expires at the end of September.
OCC Action. On May 19, as part of its monthly listing of enforcement actions taken against national banks, federal savings associations, and former institution-affiliated parties, the OCC announced that it had fined a Texas-based federal savings association $87,500 in April for violations of the FDPA. According to the consent order, the bank allegedly failed to “ensure the timely notification and force-placement of the requisite amounts of flood insurance on property securing loans in a special flood hazard area in which flood insurance is available under the NFIA.”
Federal Reserve Action. On May 25, the Board announced an enforcement action against a Georgia-based bank for violations of the NFIA. Although the consent order fines the bank $1.5 million, it does not specify how many violations there were or what they related to. However, the maximum civil money penalty under that law is $2,000 per violation. The NFIA has a number of requirements for banks, which include ensuring that a borrower has adequate flood insurance before originating a loan for a property in a special flood hazard area and providing notice to the borrower in a reasonable time before closing that they are required to have flood insurance.
National Flood Insurance Program Discussion. As previously covered in InfoBytes, several committees—including the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and the House Financial Services Committee—are discussing the reauthorization of the NFIP. On May 25, Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.), Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee, issued a series of reauthorization discussion drafts and summaries. The six bills (see below) included in the package would (i) reauthorize the NFIP for five years; (ii) limit annual premium increases; (iii) authorize states to voluntary create flood insurance affordability programs; (iv) eliminate the mandatory purchase requirement for commercial properties; (v) establish a private market for flood insurance; (vi) reform the flood zone mapping process to increase accuracy and fairness in mapping; (vii) require covered flood prone areas to develop plans to mitigate flood risks if they have repeated structure losses; and (viii) address fraud in the claims process.
- National Flood Insurance Program Policyholder Protection and Information Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary;
- Private Flood Insurance Market Development Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary;
- National Flood Insurance Program Mapping Fairness Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary;
- Flood Risk Mitigation Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary;
- National Flood Insurance Program Integrity Improvement Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary; and
- National Flood Insurance Program Administrative Reform Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary.
Duffy noted, “We’re releasing this discussion draft so that all sides can continue to provide input into protecting the program integrity of the NFIP.” He added, “The ideas stemming from this open process will ensure that everyone who needs flood insurance will have access to it while ensuring that the NFIP does not fall further into debt.”
Financial Agencies Issue Advisory Addressing Appraiser Availability
On May 31, the FDIC, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, the OCC, and the NCUA issued FIL-19-2017 to discuss two possible methods for addressing appraiser shortages: (i) temporary practice permits and (ii) temporary waivers. The resulting Interagency Advisory addresses concerns raised pursuant to the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act process regarding the shortage of certified and licensed appraisers, particularly in rural areas. The advisory states that “[t]emporary practice permits could allow state certified or licensed appraisers to provide their services in states where they are not certified or licensed, including those experiencing a shortage of appraisers.” The advisory further states that temporary waivers may also be granted thus improving the timeliness of appraisals in those areas. The advisory applies to all FDIC-supervised institutions.
OCC Updates Guidance on Violations of Laws and Regulations in Comptroller’s Handbook
On May 23, the OCC issued OCC Bulletin 2017-18 announcing updated guidance on its policies and procedures regarding violations of laws and regulations for its examiners. The updates will be reflected in its “Bank Supervision Process,” “Community Bank Supervision,” “Federal Branches and Agencies Supervision,” and “Large Bank Supervision” booklets as well as other sections of the Comptroller’s Handbook and internal guidance. According to the Bulletin, an International Peer Review Report from 2013 noted that the OCC could improve its supervisory effectiveness. In response, the OCC released Bulletin 2014-52 to address the report’s concerns. These latest updates are an extension of the 2014 Bulletin to support the OCC’s mission of ensuring a safe and sound federal banking system by “emphasizing timely detection and correction of violations before they affect a bank’s condition.”
The OCC’s updated guidance implements certain goals and practices, including:
- ensuring the consistency of the purpose, processes, and procedures within and across all OCC lines of business, including: community, midsize, and large banks; federal branches and agencies; and banks overseen by the OCC’s Special Supervision group;
- communicating violations using a consistent format such as: (i) using legal citation and description; (ii) summarizing relevant statutory or regulatory requirements; (iii) including facts supporting the violation and root causes; (iv) outlining required corrective actions; and (v) noting commitments to corrective action by board and management;
- reinforcing the importance of timely and thorough follow-up and tracking of bank management’s corrective actions and milestones;
- conveying the relationship of violations to “matters requiring attention, CAMELS/ITCC or ROCA ratings, and the bank’s risk appetite and profile;” and
- emphasizing the need for examiners to timely and effectively communicate with the bank’s board of directors and management team as well as with OCC supervisors.
The policy goes into effect July 1, 2017.
NYDFS Files Independent Lawsuit Against OCC Fintech Charter
Following the April 26 lawsuit filed by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) opposing the OCC’s fintech charter (see previous InfoBytes post), the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) filed its own lawsuit on May 12, asking the court to block the OCC from creating a new special purpose fintech charter. “The OCC’s charter decision is lawless, ill-conceived, and destabilizing of financial markets that are properly and most effectively regulated by New York and other state regulators,” NYDFS Superintendent Maria T. Vullo said in a statement announcing the lawsuit. “This charter puts New York financial consumers . . . at great risk of exploitation by newly federally chartered entities seeking to be insulated from New York’s strong consumer protections.” NYDFS’s complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleges that the OCC’s charter would include “vast preemptive powers over state law.” Specific concerns include the risk of (i) weakened regulatory controls on usury, payday loans, and other predatory lending practices; (ii) consolidation of multiple non-depository business lines under a single federal charter, thus creating more “too big to fail” institutions; and (iii) creating competitive advantages for large, well-capitalized fintech firms that could overwhelm smaller market players and thus restrict innovation in financial products and services. The complaint also asserts that the “OCC’s action is legally indefensible because it grossly exceeds the agency’s statutory authority.” Finally, the complaint claims that the proposed fintech charter would injure NYDFS monetarily because the regulator’s operating expenses are funded by assessments levied by the OCC on New York licensed financial institutions. According to NYDFS, every non-depository financial firm that receives a special purpose fintech charter from the OCC in place of a New York license deprives NYDFS of crucial resources that are necessary to fund its regulatory function.
Citing violations of the National Bank Act and conflicts with state law in violation of the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, NYDFS seeks declaratory and injunctive relief that would declare the fintech charter proposal to be unlawful and prohibit the OCC from taking further steps toward creating or issuing the charter without express Congressional authority.
In a press release issued the same day, the CSBS said it “strongly supports the [NYDFS] lawsuit” and reiterated that the OCC “does not have the authority to issue federal charters to non-banks, and its unlawful attempt to do so will harm markets, innovation and consumers.”
OCC Places Wisconsin-Based Bank into Receivership
On May 5, the OCC announced that it had put a Wisconsin-based a federal savings association (Bank) with branches in five states into receivership and appointed the FDIC as receiver. According to the OCC, the decision to close the Bank was made after determining that the Bank: (i) had experienced substantial dissipation of assets or earnings due to unsafe or unsound practices; (ii) was significantly undercapitalized; and (iii) failed to submit a capital restoration plan acceptable to the OCC.
To protect the depositors, the FDIC announced it has entered into a purchase and assumption agreement with a North Carolina-based bank to assume all of the failed Bank’s deposits and to purchase approximately $892 million of the failed Bank’s assets. The remaining assets will be retained by the FDIC for later disposition. The North Carolina bank announced that it will reopen 12 of the failed Bank’s brick-and-mortar locations but will not reopen any of the failed Bank’s 107 branches in retail outlets. Current FDIC estimates are that this failure—the fifth FDIC-insured institution to fail this year—will cost the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) $146.4 million. This closely follows the April 28 closure of a New Orleans-based bank, which the FDIC estimates will cost the DIF almost $1 billion.
OCC to Host Workshops for Community Bank Directors in June
On June 20 and 21, the OCC will be hosting two workshops in Nashville for directors of national community banks and federal savings associations supervised by the OCC. The June 20 “Credit Risk” workshop will focus on ways to identify trends and recognize problems within a loan portfolio. In addition, the workshop will discuss board and management roles, how to stay informed of changes in credit risk, and how to effect change. The June 21 “Operational Risk” workshop will focus on the key components of operational risk, and also cover governance, third-party risk, vendor management, and cybersecurity.
Additionally, from June 26 to 28, the OCC will be hosting a “Building Blocks for Directors” workshop in Atlanta for directors, senior management team members, and other key executives of national community banks and federal savings associations supervised by the OCC. The workshop will: (i) focus on the duties and core responsibilities of directors and management; (ii) discuss major laws and regulations; and (ii) provide insight on the examination process.
OCC Issues Revised Comptroller’s Licensing Manual Booklets
On May 8, the OCC announced the release of a revised Fiduciary Powers booklet of the Comptroller’s Licensing Manual, which replaces the version issued in June 2002, and applies to all national banks and federal savings associations proposing to exercise fiduciary powers. This revised booklet incorporates updated procedures and requirements following the integration of the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) into the OCC in 2011 and the revisions to 12 C.F.R. § 5 (effective July 1, 2015), which address applications for national banks and federal savings associations proposing to exercise fiduciary powers. Specifically, the revised booklet addresses the: (i) policies and procedures to guide a bank in submitting a request to exercise fiduciary powers or submitting a notice to the OCC that it is exercising fiduciary powers in a new state; and (ii) procedures for a bank to surrender its fiduciary powers and for the OCC to revoke those powers. The booklet also lists references and links to informational resources to assist applicants during the filing process.
That same day, the OCC also released a revised Public Notice and Comments booklet of the Comptroller’s Licensing Manual, which replaces the version updated in March 2007. This revised booklet incorporates public notice and comments procedures and requirements that were updated following the integration of OTS into the OCC, and the issuance of revised 12 CFR Part 5, and applies to national banks and federal savings associations, unless otherwise noted, as well as federal branches and agencies of foreign banks. In particular, the booklet addresses the “general requirements related to the public notice process, impact of Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) performance on certain applications or notices (filings), application of the convenience and needs standard under the Bank Merger Act, and requirements and procedures for conducting public hearings, public meetings, and private meetings.”
Conference of State Bank Supervisors Announce Initiatives to Obviate Need for Fintech Charter, New York Joins Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System for Fintechs
On May 10, the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) announced a “series of initiatives to modernize state regulation of non-banks, including financial technology [fintech] firms.” The draft of initiatives, branded “Vision 2020,” appear to be generally geared towards streamlining the state regulatory system so that it is capable of supporting business innovation, while still protecting the rights of consumers. As explained by CSBS Chairman and Texas Commissioner of Banking Charles G. Cooper, the CSBS is “committed to a multi-state experience that is as seamless as possible,” and, to this end, “state regulators will transform the licensing process, harmonize supervision [and] engage fintech companies.”
The initial set of actions that CSBS and state regulators are taking includes the following:
- Redesign the Nationwide Multistate Licensing System (NMLS). CSBS plans to redesign the NMLS, which is a web-based system that allows non-depository companies, branches, and individuals in the mortgage, consumer lending, money services businesses, and debt collection industries to apply for, amend, update, or renew a license online. In particular, the CSBS’s redesign will “provide a more automated licensing process for new applicants, streamline multi-state regulation, and shift state resources to higher-risk cases.”
- Harmonize multi-state supervision. CSBS has created “working groups to establish model approaches to key aspects of non-bank supervision,” to “enhance uniformity in examinations, facilitate best practices,” and “capture and report non-bank violations at the national level.” CSBS also intends to “create a common technology platform for state examinations.”
- Form an industry advisory panel. CSBS will “establish a fintech industry advisory panel to identify points of friction in licensing and multi-state regulation, and provide feedback to state efforts to modernize regulatory regimes.”
- Assist state banking departments. CSBS intends to start “education programs” that “will make state departments more effective in supervising banks and non-banks.”
- Make it easier for banks to provide services to non-banks. CSBS is also “stepping up efforts to address de-risking—where banks are cautious about doing business with non-banks, due to regulatory uncertainty – by increasing industry awareness that strong regulatory regimes exist for compliance with laws for money laundering, the Bank Secrecy Act, and cybersecurity.”
- Make supervision more efficient for third parties. CSBS also intends to “support[] federal legislation that would allow state and federal regulators to better coordinate supervision of bank third-party service providers.”
By harmonizing the supervision and licensing system and working more closely together, state regulators appear to want to eliminate a key reason to seek the OCC charter, namely the ability to deal with one federal agency and follow a single set of rules. As previously covered in InfoBytes, the CSBS and a number of individual stakeholders have fiercely opposed the OCC’s other main fintech initiative—the development of a special purpose national bank charter for payments processors, online lenders and other new entrants in the financial industry. CSBS sued the OCC last month, arguing it lacked the legal power to move forward. The overall initiative appears to be a response to the OCC’s own “responsible innovation” efforts, which—as previously covered in InfoBytes—culminated in the creation of a new office last year to correspond with fintechs and the banks interested in partnering with them.
Concurrent with CSBS’s Vision 2020 initiatives, on May 11, the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) announced that beginning July 1, 2017, it will transition to the NMLS to manage the license application and ongoing regulation of all nondepository financial institutions conducting business in the state, commencing with money transmitters. Specifically, on July 1, 2017, financial services companies holding New York money transmitter licenses will have the opportunity to transition those licenses to NMLS, and companies applying for new licenses will be able to apply through NMLS. As previously covered in InfoBytes, NMLS—a secure, web-based licensing system—will allow for easier on-line licensing renewal and enable NYDFS to “provide better supervision of the money transmitter industry by linking with other states to protect consumers.” Financial Services Superintendent Maria T. Vullo stressed that “[b]y working with the CSBS, which is leading the modernization of state regulation through Vision 2020, DFS is supporting the strong nationwide regulatory framework created by states to provide improved licensing and supervision by State regulators.”
Additional information about NMLS can be accessed through the NMLS Resource Center.
OCC Appoints Six New Members to Mutual Savings Association Advisory Committee
On May 4, the OCC announced the appointment of six new members to its Mutual Savings Association Advisory Committee (MSAAC). The committee—which is presided over by Michael R. Brickman, the Deputy Comptroller for Thrift and Special Supervision—is tasked with assessing the condition of mutual savings associations, regulatory changes and other actions the OCC may take to ensure the health and vitality of mutual savings associations, and other issues of concern to such institutions.
The six new members appointed to the committee are:
- J.R. Buckner, President and CEO, First Federal Bank of Kansas City, Kansas City, MO;
- Thomas Fraser, President and CEO, First Federal Lakewood, Lakewood, OH;
- Shirley Hughes, President and CEO, Elizabethton Federal Savings Bank, Elizabethton, TN;
- James McQuade, President and CEO, Dollar Bank, Pittsburgh, PA;
- James Wainwright, CEO, Freehold Savings Bank, Freehold, N.J.; and
- William White, President and CEO, Dearborn Federal Savings Bank, Dearborn, MI.
They join the following current MSAAC members:
- Jeffrey Hyde, President and CEO, Evergreen Federal Savings and Loan Association, Grants Pass, OR;
- Dan Moore, President and CEO, Home Bank, Martinsville, IN.; and
- Charles Timpa, President and CEO, First Federal Bank of Louisiana, Lake Charles, LA.
Additional information concerning the MSAAC, including committee meeting documents, can be accessed through the OCC’s website.
Financial CHOICE Act of 2017 Approved by House Financial Services Committee
On May 4, GOP efforts to overhaul existing financial regulations took a step forward as the House Financial Services Committee approved H.R. 10, a revised version of the “Financial CHOICE Act of 2017” in a party-line vote, 34-26. The vote concluded a two week period that included both a three-day markup, of the GOP-backed legislation—during which several Democrat committee members sought, unsuccessfully, to remove various provisions of the bill—and, a two-day hearing that included testimony from 18 different witnesses.
Originally introduced by Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) in September 2016, the main focus of the CHOICE Act was to give financial institutions the option of avoiding many of the rules set up by the 2010 Dodd-Frank law if they maintain a high level of capital and are “well-managed” as defined in the bill. The legislation, if enacted, would also end the Dodd-Frank Act’s taxpayer-funded bailouts of large financial institutions and would impose greater penalties on those who commit fraud and insider trading, while also demanding greater accountability from banking regulators. A summary of changes incorporated in the latest iteration of the proposed legislation—recently referred to as “CHOICE Act 2.0”—was released by the Committee last week and included, among other things:
- the elimination of the CFPB supervisory and examination authority;
- a restructuring of the CFPB, FHFA, OCC, and FDIC into bipartisan commissions appointed by the President;
- an opt-out of many regulatory requirements for banks and other financial institutions if they maintain a 10% leverage ratio (among other conditions);
- subjecting the federal banking regulators to greater congressional oversight and tighter budgetary control;
- reforms in bank stress tests;
- materially reducing the authority of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) and the establishment of a new process of identifying financial institutions as "systemically important";
- a repeal of the Orderly Liquidation Authority and the creation of a new bankruptcy process for banks;
- a repeal of the Volcker Rule; and
- facilitated capital raising by small companies, including through crowd-funding.
Looking ahead, the House could vote to pass the bill later this month. While a party-line vote would pass the House, the bill will likely need to pick up a minimum of 60 votes—including support from several Democrats—in order for it to pass in the Senate.