InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
NCUA Publishes Proposed Rule Offering Alternate Capital Proposal for Credit Unions
On February 8, the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) published a notice of proposed rulemaking to expand the types of investment capital that federally insured credit unions could use to meet certain regulatory requirements. NCUA is considering whether to allow credit unions to use investment capital (that would be uninsured capital subordinate to all other claims) to satisfy the risk-based net worth ratio requirement. Currently, only low-income designated credit unions are allowed to use secondary capital to satisfy two regulatory requirements: the net worth ratio and the risk-based net-worth ratio. Although any changes to the definition of net worth would require an act of Congress, the NCUA asserted in the proposal that it has broad authority to adjust the risk-based net worth ratio requirement and therefore may choose to allow credit unions that are not “low-income designated” to use alternative capital to meet this requirement.
NCUA Issues Guidance on CFPB Mortgage Servicing Rule, FDCPA Interpretive Rule
The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) has issued a regulatory alert to federally insured credit unions regarding recent amendments to the CFPB's 2013 Mortgage Servicing Rule, issued on August 4, 2016, and the Bureau’s FDCPA interpretive rule concerning safe harbors from FDCPA liability. The recent amendments to the Mortgage Servicing Rule clarify (i) Regulation X (RESPA) provisions regarding force-placed insurance notices, mortgage servicing policies and procedures, early intervention, and loss mitigation requirements, and (ii) Regulation Z (TILA) provisions regarding prompt payment crediting and periodic statement requirements. The FDCPA interpretive rule provides safe harbor for servicers acting in compliance with specified mortgage servicing rules set forth in Regulations X and Z.
District Court Dismisses Bank Trade Group's Lawsuit Regarding Credit Union Business Lending Rule
On January 24, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia issued an order dismissing a suit seeking to overturn a rule that allows federally regulated credit unions to expand their business lending activities. The complaint, filed in September 2016, claimed the NCUA exceeded the plain language of its statutory authority by permitting such business lending activities The bank trade group further alleged that because credit unions are tax-exempt, they offer commercial loans at a lower price than the trade group’s community bank members, resulting in injury to those institutions. The court, however, stated that the bank trade group failed to prove its claim or show that injury was caused to its members. “Merely codifying an extant rule in part of a new regulation does not effectuate a reopening. If anything, this reflects the agency’s view that its earlier rule is ... settled to the point that it may serve as a foundation for further rule-making,” Judge Cacheris wrote.
McWatters Named Acting NCUA Chairman
On January 25, President Trump appointed J. Mark McWatters as the acting chairman of the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA). McWatters succeeds Rick Metsger, who will remain a NCUA Board Member. McWatters was nominated to the NCUA Board by then-President Barack Obama on January 7, 2014 and took office following Senate confirmation on August 26, 2014. Prior to joining NCUA’s Board, McWatters—a licensed attorney and CPA—worked in a variety of public and private sector roles, including serving on the Governing Board of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs and as a member of the Troubled Asset Relief Program Congressional Oversight Panel. He also served as counsel to House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), who, following McWatters’ appointment, issued the following statement:
“I commend President Trump for appointing Mark McWatters to this key position. Mark is highly capable and extremely well qualified for this role. He brought a free market-oriented, transparent and accountable perspective to the NCUA Board. At a time when the regulatory burden of the Dodd-Frank Act has led to a drastic decline in the number of credit unions serving Americans, Mark’s leadership as Acting Chairman is greatly needed.”
ABA Sues Credit Union Regulator Over Field of Membership Rule
On December 7, the American Bankers Association (ABA) filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to overturn a final rule published by the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) in that morning’s Federal Register. The final rule purports to “implement changes in policy affecting: The definition of a local community, a rural district, and an underserved area; the chartering and expansion of a multiple common bond credit union; the expansion of a single common bond credit union that serves a trade, industry or profession; and the process for applying to charter, or to expand, a federal credit union.”
ABA’s law suit contends, among other things, that by “fail[ing] to adhere to the limitations on federal credit unions established by Congress,” the NCUA’s final rule “upsets the balance Congress struck between granting federal credit unions tax-favored status and limiting their operations to carefully circumscribed groups or localities that share a common bond.” Under the final rule, scheduled to take effect Feb. 6, Federal Credit Unions (FCUs) can apply to serve entire geographic regions, so-called “rural districts” up to 1 million people (which include the entirety of Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont or Wyoming), and areas contiguous to their existing service areas. NCUA is also facilitating easier conversions to community charters.
Proposed Rule Issued to Stimulate Robust Marketplace for Private Flood Insurance
On October 20, the FDIC, OCC, Federal Reserve, Farm Credit Administration, and National Credit Union Administration issued a proposed rule intended to develop further the private flood insurance marketplace by implementing certain provisions of the 2012 Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act (Biggert-Waters Act). Notably, the proposed rule would “require regulated lending institutions to accept policies that meet the statutory definition of private flood insurance in the Biggert-Waters Act and permit regulated lending institutions to accept flood insurance provided by private insurers that does not meet the statutory definition of ‘private flood insurance’ on a discretionary basis, subject to certain restrictions.” Comments on the proposal are due 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register.
NCUA Settles MBS Case with Foreign Bank
A foreign bank has agreed to pay $1.1 billion to settle lawsuits brought in Kansas and California in 2011 by the National Credit Union Administration Board (NCUA) as the liquidating agent for two corporate credit unions. The lawsuit centered on claims that the bank sold faulty mortgage-backed securities, contributing to the failures of the two credit unions during the financial crisis.
Treasury Issues Joint BSA/AML Fact Sheet
On August 30, the Department of the Treasury, along with the OCC, FDIC, Federal Reserve and NCUA, issued a joint fact sheet on foreign correspondent banking. The fact sheet provides a summary of the agencies’ (i) expectations for BSA/AML and OFAC risk management at U.S. depository institutions; (ii) risk-based approach to the supervisory examination process; and (iii) use of enforcement as an “extension of the supervisory process.” As highlighted in a corresponding blog post, the fact sheet explains that about “95% of BSA/OFAC compliance deficiencies identified by the [Federal Banking Agencies], FinCEN, and OFAC are corrected by the institution’s management without the need for any enforcement action or penalty.” The fact sheet notes that, under existing regulations there is no general requirement for depository institutions to conduct due diligence on an individual customer of a foreign financial institution (FFI). But it also notes that “[i]n determining the appropriate level of due diligence necessary for an FFI relationship, U.S. depository institutions should consider the extent to which information related to the FFI’s markets and types of customers is necessary to assess the risks posed by the relationship, satisfy the institution’s obligations to detect and report suspicious activity, and comply with U.S. economic sanctions. This may require U.S. depository institutions to request additional information concerning the activity underlying the FFI’s transactions in accordance with the suspicious activity reporting rules and sanctions compliance obligations.”
FFIEC Issues Cybersecurity Statement, Comments on Recent Attacks on Interbank Messaging and Payment Networks
On June 7, the FFIEC issued a statement on behalf of its members (the OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, NCUA, CFPB, and State Liaison Committee) advising financial institutions to “actively manage the risks associated with interbank messaging and wholesale payment networks.” According to the statement, recent cyber attacks against interbank networks and wholesale payment systems have demonstrated the ability to: (i) bypass information security controls and compromise a financial institution’s wholesale payment origination environment; (ii) “obtain and use valid operator credentials with the authority to create, approve, and submit messages”; (iii) make use of sophisticated understanding of funds transfer operations and operational controls; (iv) disable security logging and reporting by using highly customized malware, as well as conceal and delay detection of fraudulent transactions with the use of other operational controls; and (v) quickly transfer stolen funds across multiple jurisdictions. Due to the potential financial loss and compliance risk associated with the unauthorized transactions, the statement reminds financial institutions to consider the following steps to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements and FFIEC guidance: (i) establish and maintain an information security risk assessment program that “considers new and evolving threat intelligence related to online accounts and adjust customer authentication, layered security, and other controls in response to identified risks”; (ii) implement and maintain protection and detection systems, including antivirus protection and intrusion detection systems, and properly monitor system alerts; (iii) protect against unauthorized access to critical systems by, among other things, “limiting the number or credentials with elevated privileges across institutions” and establishing authentication rules; (iv) implement and regularly test controls around critical systems, and report test results to senior management, as well as the board of directors, if appropriate; (v) validate business continuity planning and ensure that the institution is able to “quickly recover and maintain payment processing operations”; (vi) strengthen information security awareness by conducting regular and mandatory training; and (vii) participate in industry information-sharing forums, such as the Financial Services Information Sharing and Analysis Center.
In light of the FFIEC’s statement, the OCC simultaneously released Bulletin 2016-08, cautioning financial institutions that use interbank messaging and wholesale payment networks to take the aforementioned risk mitigation steps.
CFPB, Federal Banking Agencies, and NCUA Issue Interagency Guidance Regarding Deposit Reconciliation Practices
On May 18, the CFPB, the Federal Reserve, the OCC, the FDIC, and the NCUA issued interagency guidance on supervisory expectations regarding customer account deposit reconciliation practices. According to the guidance, banks create a “credit discrepancy” if they credit a customer a different amount than the total of the items the customer tried to deposit into an account. In further explaining what constitutes a credit discrepancy, the guidance states, “the customer may deposit $110 to an account, but may indicate on the deposit slip that only $100 has been tendered. In this case, the financial institution may credit $100 to the customer’s account as indicated on the deposit slip without reconciling the $10 discrepancy.” According to the guidance, some financial institutions fail to correct the inconsistencies between the dollar value of items deposited to the customer’s account and the amount actually credited to that same account. This is a potential violation of (i) the Expedited Funds Availability Act’s, as implemented by Regulation CC, requirement to make deposited funds available for withdrawal within prescribed time limits; (ii) the FTC Act’s ban of unfair or deceptive acts or practices; and (iii) the Dodd-Frank Act’s prohibition of unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices. In addition to reminding financial institutions of their obligations to comply with the aforementioned applicable laws, the guidance stresses that financial institutions are expected to “adopt deposit reconciliation policies and practices that are designed to avoid or reconcile discrepancies, or designed to resolve discrepancies such that customers are not disadvantaged.”