Choose Site

The long-awaited and somewhat delayed TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure Rule took effect on October 3. The new rule requires mortgage lenders to use a new, integrated disclosure form and comply with new rules regarding disclosures and timing of the same.

Because of industry pressures, the Integrated Disclosure Rule’s implementation was delayed by two months (the original effective date was August 1). Despite industry concerns regarding the ability to comply with the new rule and possible delays that the new rule would cause for mortgage closings after October 1, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) declined requests to further delay the rule. In a letter to the industry, CFPB Director Richard Cordray stated that the CFPB recognizes the “substantial resources” that the mortgage industry has had to dedicate to the conversion to the new disclosures, and in initial examinations, CFPB examiners will look for “good-faith efforts” to comply with the rule. According to Director Cordray, examiners will consider a mortgage lender’s

  • implementation plan, including actions to update policies and procedures;
  • training of appropriate staff; and
  • handling of early technical problems and other implementation challenges.

On September 29, four senators and 39 representatives sent a letter to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Richard Cordray expressing concern about the CFPB’s proposed rulemaking for prepaid accounts. (Read our LawFlash discussing the proposed rule.)

The letter specifically identifies four areas of concern:

  • The broad coverage of the proposed rule, which encompasses person-to-person transfers and other transactions where consumers might not necessarily expect protections similar to credit cards and other traditional financial products.
  • The requirement of multiple disclosures, and the lack of usefulness of the long-form disclosure.
  • The implementation deadline—requesting 24 months from the final rule’s publication date instead of the proposed nine-month implementation period.
  • The effect of the overdraft provisions and whether consumers would be better served by overdrafts that allow for “micro-credit” but are exempt from the requirements of Regulation Z.

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the other federal agencies tasked with implementing the Volcker Rule recently released two additional frequently asked questions (FAQs). Both FAQs address compliance obligations with respect to particular exceptions to the Volcker Rule’s proprietary trading prohibition—market-making activity and prime brokerage transactions.

FAQ 17 addresses an aspect of the required compliance program for a trading desk that is engaged in market making–related activity. The FAQ states that a banking entity’s trading desk may rely on objective factors, a shared utility. or a third-party service provider to determine whether an issuer of a security is a covered fund, but such reliance must be incorporated into the banking entity’s written compliance program and be subject to independent testing and audit to ensure efficacy.

FAQ 18 addresses the timing of the annual CEO certification required in connection with permissible prime brokerage transactions. Generally, the first CEO certification (if applicable) should be submitted by March 31, 2016. For covered funds that were sponsored or owned by a banking entity prior to December 31, 2013 (“legacy covered funds”), the first CEO certification (if applicable) should be submitted by March 31 following the end of the relevant conformance period.

Read the new FAQs.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s (OCC’s) Committee on Bank Supervision has released its Fiscal Year 2016 priorities. Not surprisingly, the top supervision and examination priorities are

  • governance and oversight,
  • credit underwriting and risk, and
  • cybersecurity.

Other priorities include the Bank Secrecy Act/money laundering, operational risk, compliance, interest rate risk, and fair access. The OCC’s expectations under each of the priorities differ for large banks and midsize and community banks. The OCC continues to emphasize compliance with its guidance on third-party relationships. OCC examiners will also begin to use the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council’s Cybersecurity Assessment Tool released in June 2015 to supplement their exam work.. The Cybersecurity Assessment Tool has caused some concerns among smaller banks for potentially being too rigid.

These supervisory priorities are consistent with the top risks identified in the OCC’s Spring 2015 Semiannual Risk Perspective. All OCC-supervised institutions should be mindful of the 2016 priorities and be prepared for examiners to emphasize each of the categories during the next exam.

Read the OCC Fiscal Year 2016 Operating Plan.