Principles of Bank Regulation
Author:
Malloy, Michael P.
Edition:
3rd
Copyright Date:
2011
19 chapters
have results for banking
Chapter 9. International Banking 180 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The development of international banking by U.S.-based banks For the most part, U.S. international banking has followed the expansion of transnational business interests of U.S. banks’ larger customers. By 1914, however, European banks still dominated foreign bank branching over U.S. banks by a margin of almost 100 to 1.
- An affiliate bank may represent a passive portfolio-type investment, in which control is not exercised by the outside parent banking enterprise. It may be controlled by local or by other foreign banks. On the other hand, an active affiliate, or consortium bank, may operate as a joint venture, separately incorporated and owned by multiple banks, usually from different countries, often with no majority-controlling shareholder.
- The IBBEA amended the IBA rules governing interstate operations of foreign banks. In general, it subjects the establishment of interstate operations of a federal branch or agency of a foreign bank to the same rules that would apply if the foreign bank were a national bank seeking to branch interstate. Similarly, the IBBEA subjects the establishment of interstate operations of a state-licensed branch or agency of a foreign bank to the same rules that would apply if the foreign bank were a state bank seeking to branch interstate.
- Operation of any interstate branch or agency of a foreign bank is subject to the same IBBEA rules governing domestic branches of national and state banks resulting from interstate merger transactions. However, an additional, potentially controversial requirement may apply to foreign banks. The 1991 FDICIA required foreign banks entering the U.S. retail deposit market to operate through a separately chartered U.S. subsidiary, rather than a direct branch. The IBBEA extends this requirement, under certain specified circumstances, to interstate operations of any foreign bank. If the Fed or the Comptroller finds that, in light of differing regulatory or accounting standards in a foreign bank’s home country, adherence by the bank to applicable U.S. capital requirements could only be verified if the foreign bank’s U.S. banking activities were carried out in a separate U.S. subsidiary, the agencies the authority to require that the foreign bank (or the company controlling the foreign bank)...
- Permissible international banking activities vary significantly from country to country, largely due to the differing regulatory environments in their respective home states. As a general rule, in less developed countries banking is subject to more severe controls than in developed economies. However, given the increasingly “globalized” nature of the banking markets, the regulatory environment facing a bank involved in international banking tends to be a complex mix of home-state supervision, host-state regulation, and specialized international or multinational rules enforced by both states.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 3. Branching 127 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Common control exerted by a holding company enterprise over constituent operating subsidiaries is often referred to as “group banking.” Group banking differs from chain banking in the formality of the control relationship. However, group banking is as vulnerable in principle as chain banking to the possibility that the regulator may consider it to be an impermissible evasion of branch banking regulation. Before the enactment of federal law in 1994 permitting interstate branch banking, this concern over group banking was an important issue for state regulators.
- The situs of the national bank in was Florida, which prohibited all branch banking by state chartered banks, and hence by all national banks as well. The Comptroller permitted the bank to operate an armored car messenger service and an off-premises receptacle for the receipt of packages containing cash or checks for deposit. The Comptroller’s letters authorizing the services contained explicit requirements that deposits received through these services not become bank liabilities until actually in the hands of the bank teller at the office of the bank, and that checks cashed for customers be deemed paid at the bank when the cash was handed to the messenger, not when delivered to the customer by the armored car teller. The Florida Bank Comptroller challenged the services, arguing that Florida unequivocally prohibited off-premises banking of any kind.
- A key provision of the National Bank Act (“NBA”) authorizes the establishment of intrastate branches of national banks, with the approval of the Comptroller, to the extent that “such establishment and operation are at the time expressly authorized to State banks by the law of the State in question.…” In addition, the branch is permitted to be established outside the city in which the principal office of the national bank is located only if state statutory law permits such branching by state banks “affirmatively and not Establishment of the branch is also subject to capital requirements that would apply to a state bank application for a branch. In addition, until 1996, the aggregate capital of the bank and its branches was required to be at least equal to the aggregate minimum required capital for the establishment of the bank and each of its branches as separate national banks.
- First National Bank of Logan v. Walker Bank & Trust Co.
- The Utah branching statute prohibited Utah banks, with certain exceptions, from branching except through the acquisition of an existing bank that had been in operation for not less than five years. The two applicant national banks had sought to establish one district court had found “express authority” for state bank branching in general, and would not apply the specific conditions that would have attached to a branch application of a state bank. a national bank could branch, and possibly it might branch. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Section 36(c) created a policy of “competitive equality” between state and national banks, which required “reference over” to all pertinent provisions of state branching law. In the other application, another district court “imposed all of the restrictions of … Utah law on the establishment of national banks and the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed.”
- Open Chapter
Chapter 1. The Regulated Environment of Banking 153 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Over-issuance of state bank notes became a major problem. The 1837 depression, for example, was in part due to the over-issuance problem. Nevertheless, in the same year “free banking” statutes began to emerge, allowing for organization of state banks by general legislation, rather than by a special legislative act. In 1837, the legislature of Michigan enacted one of the first free banking acts and in 1838, the New York legislature enacted a free banking act. The free banking acts made it a condition of incorporation that the bank deposit securities with the state that could be used to pay off the bank’s depositors in the event of a failure by the bank. Unfortunately, the quality of the securities deposited in fulfillment of this requirement was often questionable, and supervision of banks under the free banking systems was
- Current bank regulatory policy is still rehearsing the historical controversies surrounding the development of banking and bank regulation. Banking has, of course, longstanding European precursors to the American experience, but this book focuses on U.S. models of bank regulation.
- With the eclipse of the Second Bank, a long period of state primacy in bank regulation set in, with disparate and inconsequential results. The emerging primacy of the state banks brought with it new problems for state governments. How were these institutions to be regulated? One of the first notable attempts at regulation during this period was in fact not governmental but private. Providing some of the protections of a central bank system, the so-called Suffolk system was instituted in Boston during the 1820s by a group of Boston banks. Suffolk Bank of Boston held deposits for outlying “country banks,” the notes of which could be redeemed at Boston at their par value. To police this system and avoid instability due to over-issuance of bank notes, the Boston banks would accumulate large number of notes from country banks that were not participants in the system. These notes would be presented ...banks for payment. Faced with the possibility of these burdensome calls on their...
- The new bank soon encountered hostility. State banks claimed that the Bank expanded the economy by liberal loans to the state banks during times of favorable financial conditions, but then triggered the collapse of these state banks by demands for repayment during the periods of financial difficulty. Several states passed legislation to curb the activities of the Bank. Maryland’s law, taxing bank notes issued by the Baltimore branch of the Bank, eventually precipitated the Supreme Court’s decision in . Constitutional law scholars celebrate the case as one of the first significant constitutional decisions of the Court, but of course it should actually be honored as one of the first significant bank regulatory law decisions. Writing for the Court in , Chief Justice Marshall focused first on the question of whether Congress had power to incorporate a bank. He admitted that the power of establishing a bank or creating a corporation was not among the enumerated powers granted to the...
- to the development of constitutional theory is beyond dispute, but what do they tell us about the tensions inherent in the development of banking as a regulated industry in the United States? In the early stages of the history of U.S. bank regulation, arguments about the merits of federal bank regulatory policy were often couched in terms of constitutional theory. This was the case, for example, in President Jackson’s July 1832 message vetoing the bill to recharter the Second Bank.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 7. Securities Regulation Part 2 146 results (showing 5 best matches)
- , International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; Inter–American Development Bank; Asian Development Bank; African Development Bank; European Investment Bank. Claims on other multilateral development banks of which G–10 countries are shareholding members may, at national discretion, also attract a twenty percent weight.
- “Bank” for these purposes means “any national bank, or any banking institution organized under the laws of any State, territory, or the District of Columbia, the business of which is substantially confined to banking and is supervised by the State or territorial banking commission or similar official.” 15 U.S.C.A. § 77c(a)(2).
- , BIS, Committee on Banking Supervision, (July 1994); BIS, Committee on Banking Supervision, (July 1994); BIS, Committee on Banking Supervision, (July 1994); BIS, Committee on Banking Supervision,
- 68 Fed. Reg. 45,900 (2003) (to be codified at 12 C.F.R. pt. 3, App. A, B (OCC rules applicable to national banks), pt. 208, App. A, E (Fed rules applicable to state member banks), pt. 225, App. A, E (Fed rules applicable to bank holding companies), pt. 325, App. A, C (FDIC rules applicable to state nonmember banks), pt. 567 (OTS rules applicable to savings associations)).
- The rule specifically defines an “eligible security” as a security that is not being sold from the inventory of the bank or an affiliate of the bank, and not being underwritten by the bank or an affiliate of the bank on a firm-commitment basis unless the bank acquired the security from an unaffiliated distributor that did not purchase the security from the bank or an affiliate of the bank. 17 C.F.R. § 240.3a5–2(b)(2). For these purposes, the term “distributor” is defined to have the same meaning as in Rule 902(d).
- Open Chapter
Chapter 4. Control Transactions 237 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The BHCA prohibits, absent prior Fed approval, any action taken that causes any company to become a bank holding company. In addition, bank holding companies are subject to a number of prohibitions with respect to their acquisition of control over any additional bank or any other bank holding company. Thus, bank holding companies are prohibited from taking any of the following actions, absent prior Fed approval: (1) Any action that would cause a bank to become a bank holding company subsidiary. (2) Acquisition of direct or indirect ownership or control of any voting shares of any bank by a bank holding company if, after the acquisition, the company would own or control more than five percent of the voting shares of the bank. assets of a bank by the bank holding company or any nonbanking subsidiary of the company. (4) Merger or consolidation with any other bank holding company.
- . A merger between a national bank and another national bank or a state-chartered bank under the national bank charter of the surviving bank also requires approval of the OCC under the NBA. , the amount of capital stock of the surviving national bank and the stock that will be outstanding on completion of the merger, in an amount not less than would be required for the chartering of a national bank in the place where the surviving bank is located. The agreement must also specify the amount of stock to be allocated, if any, and cash to be paid, if any, to the target bank shareholders. The NBA also requires that the merger agreement provide that the surviving bank shall be liable for all liabilities of the target bank.
- For these purposes, the “responsible agency” means the Comptroller, if the acquiring bank is a national bank or a District of Columbia bank; the Fed is the “responsible agency” if the bank is a state member bank (other than a District of Columbia bank); the FDIC, if the bank is a state nonmember insured bank (other than a District of Columbia bank or a savings bank supervised by the OTS); and the OTS, if the acquiring institution is a savings association.
- Prior to the enactment of the IBBEA, the BHCA generally did not affect the authority of states to regulate banks and bank holding companies subject to their jurisdiction. Aside from preempting state authority to prohibit interstate bank holding company acquisitions, the IBBEA not only confirms state authority over bank holding companies, but also explicitly provides that nothing in the Act is to be construed as affecting the authority of states and their political subdivisions to subject banks, bank holding companies, foreign banks, and affiliates thereof to state taxation.
- (1) If the merger would give the resulting bank a branch or bank affiliate in a state in which the acquiring bank had no branch or bank affiliate, the responsible federal agency must It must take into account the most recent written CRA evaluation of any bank that would be an affiliate of the resulting bank. The agency must also take into account the record of any applicant bank in complying with applicable state community reinvestment laws.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 2. Entry Rules 130 results (showing 5 best matches)
- In the case of a merger or consolidation of a national bank with a state-chartered nonmember bank in which the state-chartered bank survives or results, Fed membership of the surviving or resulting institution is optional. If the state-chartered bank participating in the merger or consolidation had been a member bank, then its Fed membership will continue in the surviving or resulting bank.
- Upon conversion, the resulting state-chartered bank may be admitted to membership in the Federal Reserve System by the Fed. If the resulting bank does not obtain Fed membership, the stock of the Federal Reserve Bank owned by the converted national bank must be canceled and repaid. If the resulting bank is an FDIC-insured, nonmember bank, and it will have less capital stock or surplus than the converting bank, an FDIC application may be required for consent to convert.
- 12 U.S.C.A. § 1815(a). However, state-chartered banks that are subsidiaries of bank holding companies, and banks that are themselves holding companies of other banks, are generally required by the Bank Holding Company Act to be FDIC-insured. 12 U.S.C.A. § 1842(e).
- Nevertheless, some significant distinctions remain. One obvious difference is that a national bank is required to be a member of the Federal Reserve System, whereas membership of state-chartered banks is voluntary. Of far greater importance, however, is the fact that membership will also subject the proposed bank to other federal banking statutes expressly applicable to member banks.
- Every national member bank The situation of state-chartered banks is more complicated. If a state-chartered nonmember bank opts to obtain FDIC insurance—as virtually all such banks do If a state-chartered bank opts to become a member of the Federal Reserve System, FDIC insurance requirements are automatically imposed. If a state-chartered bank is converted into a national member bank, the requirement of FDIC insurance is automatically imposed, in the same way in which FDIC insurance is required for national member banks.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 7. Securities Regulation 105 results (showing 5 best matches)
- A commercial bank acting as a transfer agent agency.” For purposes of transfer agent regulation of commercial banks, the “appropriate regulatory agencies” are: (1) the Comptroller, for national banks and D.C. banks, and subsidiaries of such banks; (2) the Fed, for state member banks, subsidiaries thereof, bank holding companies, and subsidiaries of bank holding companies that are banks other than banks subject to the authority of the Comptroller or the FDIC; and, (3) the FDIC, for state-chartered nonmember insured banks and subsidiaries thereof.
- Discount brokerage services are one area in the securities sector where banks have become active. In 1982, the Comptroller abandoned a longstanding interpretation—that Section 16 of the Glass–Steagall Act limited bank brokerage activities to current customers of traditional banking services—by allowing a national bank to establish a subsidiary to offer retail discount brokerage services to any customer at branch offices of the bank. The Comptroller subsequently made clear that his new interpretation of Section 16 applied to brokerage activities undertaken directly by a bank itself, in addition to those of a bank subsidiary.
- the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the bank or banks and [company] involved, including the financial capability of the bank to make a proposed investment …, and possible adverse effects such as undue concentration of resources, unfair or decreased competition, conflicts of interest, or unsafe or unsound banking practices.
- At the same time that the joint rule was issued, the SEC adopted rules and rule amendments regarding exemptions from the definitions of “broker” and “dealer” under the 1934 Act for bank securities activities. Intended to complement Regulation R, the rules and rule amendments for the most part reflect changes that the GLBA made to the 1934 Act with respect to the status of banks as “dealers.” that will allow banks to effect riskless principal transactions with non-U.S. persons pursuant to Regulation S the bank or an affiliate, and that are not underwritten by the bank or an affiliate on a firm commitment basis (apart from securities acquired from an unaffiliated distributor). In addition, this exemption will apply only to Reg S transactions that a bank makes on a “riskless principal” basis. This focus permits U.S. banks to sell securities overseas that foreign banks themselves sell, “thus helping to avoid placing U.S. banks at a competitive disadvantage with respect to eligible...
- The Glass–Steagall Act notwithstanding, banking enterprises have authority to engage in a wide range of securities underwriting activities. Even before the enactment of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA), banks and bank holding company securities subsidiaries were permitted to underwrite “bank-eligible” securities. In addition, so long as it did not account for more than 25 percent of its business, a bank holding company securities subsidiary was also permitted to underwrite “bank-ineligible” securities,
- Open Chapter
Chapter 5. Transactional Rules 122 results (showing 5 best matches)
- —and all insured bank shareholders or members must be located in the same state —then investment of an insured bank is permitted with prior notice to the bank’s appropriate federal regulator.
- the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the bank or banks and bank service company involved, including the financial capability of the bank to make a proposed investment under this chapter, and possible adverse effects such as undue concentration of resources, unfair or decreased competition, conflicts of interest, or unsafe or unsound banking practices.
- Banks, and particularly national banks, have made significant inroads into the insurance industry. by national banks as an incidental power.
- As a general rule, no member bank is permitted to extend credit in any manner to any of its own executive officers. executive officer of any member bank is permitted to become indebted to the bank, except through an extension of credit that the bank is specifically authorized to make by statute. Furthermore, even an authorized extension of credit must be promptly reported to the board of directors of the bank.
- A member bank may also make “general limit” loans, extensions of credit not otherwise specifically authorized by statute, to any executive officer of the bank in an amount prescribed in a regulation of the member bank’s “appropriate Federal banking agency.” Aside from these loans, however, a member bank is
- Open Chapter
Chapter 8. Resolution of Institution Failures 161 results (showing 5 best matches)
- (2) the end of any period established under state law during which the out-of-state bank holding company may not be treated as a bank holding company whose insured bank subsidiaries’ operations are “principally conducted” in the state for purposes of acquiring other insured banks or establishing bank branches.
- If the target is in danger of default, somewhat different conditions apply. In this case, one or more out-of-state banks or holding companies are permitted to acquire and retain shares or assets of an insured bank in danger of default if it has total assets of $500 million or more. In addition, such banks or holding companies may acquire two or more affiliated insured banks in danger of closing if the targets have aggregate total assets of $500 million or more, or if the aggregate total is equal to or greater than 33 percent of the aggregate total assets of all such affiliated insured banks. In either case, if the 33 percent test is met, the acquirors may also acquire and retain shares or assets of the holding company that controls the affiliated target banks or any other affiliated insured banks.
- (ii) at the time such assistance is granted, the insured bank, the holding company which controls the insured bank (if any), or any affiliated insured bank is eligible to be acquired by an out-of-State bank or out-of-State holding company under this paragraph,
- If a merger, consolidation, transfer, or acquisition involves a savings association eligible for FDIC assistance and a bank or bank holding company, the savings association may retain and operate any existing branch or branches or any other existing facilities. If the savings association continues to exist as a separate entity, it may establish and operate new branches to the same extent as any savings association that is not affiliated with a bank holding company, and the home office of which is located in the same state. If the savings association does not have its home office in the state of the bank holding company bank subsidiary, and it does not qualify as a “domestic building and loan association” for tax purposes, the savings association is subject to the same conditions imposed on a bank seeking to retain, operate, and establish branches in the state in which the insured association is located.
- See, e.g., Levin: Treasury Needs Firm Commitment From Banks to Use New Funds for Loans, BNA Banking Daily, Oct. 20, 2008, available at http://news.bna.com; Malini Manickavasagam, Pelosi, Reid, Other Lawmakers Share Concern Over Banks’ Possible TARP Misuse, BNA Banking Daily (Oct. 30, 2008), available at http://news.bna.com.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 5. Transactional Rules Part 2 196 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Institutions which had previously engaged both in commercial and deposit banking on the one hand and investment banking on the other were required to elect prior to June 16, 1934, which of the two functions they would pursue to the exclusion of the other. This resulted in the complete elimination of the commercial banks and trust companies from the investment banking business; and the various bank affiliates were dissolved and liquidated.
- , 309 U.S. 590, 60 S.Ct. 796 (1940) (using statutory provisions as measure of bank’s powers);
- . 12 U.S.C.A. § 376 (prohibiting payment of preferential rate of interest by member bank to director, officer, attorney, or employee); § 1972(2) (prohibiting tying between bank extending credit to insider of another bank and insider’s own bank).
- (E) any company that [the Fed] determines by regulation or order to have a relationship with the member bank or any subsidiary or affiliate of the member bank, such that covered transactions by the member bank or its subsidiary with that company may be affected by the relationship to the detriment of the member bank or its subsidiary.…
- Federal Intermediate Credit Bank of Omaha v. L’Herisson
- Open Chapter
Chapter 9. International Banking Part 2 144 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The Role of Foreign Banks in International Banking, in
- The law of the European Union as it affects, among other things, bank regulation, is of considerable interest in this regard. , 107 Banking L.J. 148 (1990). Certain recent EU developments may significantly restrict or modify entry of U.S. banks into the single integrated EU banking market. , Int’l Fin. L. Rev. (April 1988) (discussing integration of EU markets). Under the Second Banking Directive (1988), reciprocity of treatment of EU banks is the basis on which U.S. and other non-EU based banks are permitted to enter the single European market.
- Commission review is necessary because of treaty restrictions on state aid limiting member state ability to grant aid or other incentives or supports under certain specified circumstances. See Consolidated Version of the Treaty Establishing the European Community art. 87, Mar. 25, 1997, 2002 O.J. (C 325) 33 (“[A]id granted by a Member State … in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition … shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market.…”). See also art. 88, formerly Article 93 (providing for review of state aids provided by member states to determine compatibility with single market). So, for example, the Competition Commissioner has already questioned the $22 billion paid by the Dutch government in nationalizing Dutch operations of Fortis Bank and its subsidiary ABN AMRO, since the recapitalization of the bank did not comply with November 2008 Commission rules with respect to EU members’ overall bank...
- National Commercial Banking Corp. of Australia, Ltd. v. Harris
- 72 Fed. Reg. 69,288 (2007) (codified at 12 C.F.R. pts. 3 (OCC rules), 208, 225 (Fed rules), 325 (FDIC rules), 559–560, 563, 567 (OTS rules)). For simplicity, the final rule uses the term “bank” to include banks, savings associations, and bank holding companies (BHCs). 72 Fed. Reg. at 69,288 n.1. The terms “bank holding company” and “BHC” do not include savings and loan holding companies regulated by the OTS.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 6. Holding Company Activities 48 results (showing 5 best matches)
- As events have overtaken the act’s FHC provisions, it turns out that not just BHCs but also other financial services firms—like investment banks and insurance companies—have been attracted to the idea of reorganizing and diversifying as FHCs. Insurance companies have shown increasing interest in acquiring or establishing de novo banking and financial services affiliates under the FHC structure. Since 1999, over fifteen insurance companies have established such affiliates, including State Farm Group (State Farm Bank), MetLife (MetLife Bank NA), American International Group (AIG Federal Savings Bank), and Allstate Corp. (Allstate Bank), with total assets of $28 billion. With large bank-based FHCs possibly withdrawing from the insurance sector and selling off insurance assets, ...companies have an opportunity to diversify into a sector with a higher return on equity. Efficiencies are also being achieved by these insurance companies by maintaining their banking affiliates as “... ...banks...
- In late 2008, two major investment banks, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, reorganized their operations to convert to bank holding company status, with a full service bank as an operating subsidiary. Goldman Sachs converted some of its operations to a full service bank approved by New York State, and Morgan Stanley similarly converted some of its operations to a national bank approved by the Comptroller of the Currency.
- One final set of differences between the BHCA and HOLA provisions concerns the applicability of HOLA to certain entities. First, upon application, a savings bank or cooperative bank may be treated as a savings association for purposes of the holding company provisions of the HOLA, if the OTS determines that the bank is a qualified thrift lender. Second, a bank holding company subject to the BHCA, or a company controlled by such a bank holding company, is exempt from the HOLA provisions.
- By its own terms, the BHCA reserves to the states the right to exercise jurisdiction over bank holding companies. restrictive than the BHCA on the question of the scope of nonbanking activities of bank holding companies, but it is doubtful whether a state could expand the permissible nonbanking activities of a bank holding company beyond the limits established by the BHCA. Hence, the BHCA effectively defines the outer limits of nonbanking activities of bank holding companies.
- Whitney Nat’l Bank
- Open Chapter
Index 118 results (showing 5 best matches)
Chapter 10. Bank Regulation and Social Policy 63 results (showing 5 best matches)
- , the Supreme Court held that the mortgage business of a national bank conducted by a non-banking operating subsidiary of the bank was subject to the exclusive (and preemptive) supervisory jurisdiction of the OCC, and not to the licensing, reporting, and visitorial authority of any state in which the subsidiary operated. Preemption of the state law regime was required because of the “unduly burdensome and duplicative” nature of the state regulation. This analysis was bolstered by the fact that federal statutory law barred national banks from being subject to any “visitorial powers” of the states except as authorized by federal law. The fact that this ban referred only to national banks, not to
- any office of a bank, savings bank, card issuer …, industrial loan company, trust company, savings association, building and loan, or homestead association (including cooperative banks), credit union, or consumer finance institution, located in any state or territory of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, or the Virgin Islands.
- Bank Holding Company Restructuring Alternatives Following the Enactment of the Riegle–Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994
- amends the CRA to provide that election by a bank holding company (“BHC”) to become a “financial holding company” (“FHC”) The GLBA also amends the Bank Holding Company Act (“BHCA”) to require the appropriate federal banking agency to prohibit an FHC (or a bank, through a financial subsidiary) from commencing any new activity, or acquiring any company, under section 4(k) or (n) of the BHCA, or under the National Bank Act (“NBA”) if the bank or any of its insured depository institution affiliates (or any insured depository institution affiliate of the FHC) fails to have at least a “satisfactory” CRA rating at the time of its last examination. The prohibition ceases to apply once the bank and all of its insured depository institution affiliates (or all of the insured depository institutions controlled by the FHC) have restored their CRA performance rating to at least the “satisfactory” level.
- . U.S.C.A. § 378 (separating banking from securities); 1843(a) (separating bank-related activities of holding companies from nonbanking activities).
- Open Chapter
Acknowledgements 17 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Can 10b–5 for the Banks? The Effect of an Antifraud Rule on the Regulation of Banks
- Balancing Public Confidence and Confidentiality: Adjudication Practices and Procedures of the Federal Bank Regulatory Agencies
- Banking in the Twenty–First Century
- Double, Double Toil and Trouble: Bank Regulatory Policy at Mid–Decade
- Nonbanks and Nondefinitions: New Challenges in Bank Regulatory Policy
- Open Chapter
Table of Contents 27 results (showing 5 best matches)
List of Figures 4 results
Preface to the Third Edition 1 result
- I remain, as always, thankful for the support and encouragement of my wife, Susie A. Malloy, during my work on this new edition. The success of the work owes much to the groundwork provided by my past student research assistants, especially Mr. Michael P. Battin, of the Fordham University Class of 1996, Mr. Edward Miklautsch, of the Fordham University Class of 1997, and Ms. Suzanne Uzelac, of the McGeorge Law School Class of 1998. I thank them for all of their invaluable assistance in bringing the project to first light, and I also thank the many students who have participated in my banking courses over the past fifteen years and have made my interest in financial services law a source of continuing delight.
- Open Chapter
Preface to the Second Edition 1 result
- ...of that year, the president signed into law the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, which worked remarkable changes in the field. The effects of those changes are still being implemented through regulatory amendment and litigation. In September 2001, the tragedy of terrorist attacks upon the United States of America and its citizens prompted, among other things, regulatory, statutory and multilateral responses that are having a significant impact on the provision of financial services—domestically as well as internationally. These events are dramatic, but they represent only the highlights of a constant stream of developments. Indeed, in the twenty years since I began teaching bank and financial services regulation, the field has transformed itself in so many ways that it almost seems to be a different subject altogether. Now more than ever, we all remain students of the subject, no matter how long our experience. The intellectual and practical challenges that confront us students are...
- Open Chapter
- Publication Date: May 5th, 2011
- ISBN: 9780314194565
- Subject: Banking/Financial Institutions
- Series: Concise Hornbook Series
- Type: Hornbook Treatises
- Description: This title examines depository institution regulation and how federal statutes governing banking have been subject to constant amendment in recent years, especially since the mortgage market collapse and the ensuing worldwide crisis. It discusses the growing overlap in competition among depository institutions, insurance companies, and securities firms that has further complicated regulatory policy. Additional discussion covers the regulated environment of banking, entry rules, branching, control transactions, transactional rules, holding company activities, securities regulation, resolution of institution failures, international banking, and more.
