Compliance Blog

Editor's Note.  Some of you had a difficult time opening certain links in yesterday's blog post. Here's my guess regarding what happened.  Many of you receive the blog post via email, and many email systems make it difficult to click on hyperlinks for security reasons.  If you had those problems yesterday, here's what I'd do.  Go to the actual blog post on the internet, which is here, and try the links again. Compliance peeps who had problems with the links in the email indicated to me that they were able to open the documents from the blog's web site. 

Posted by Anthony Demangone

Here are a few items of note...

The CFPB. Stories about President Obama appointing Elizabeth Warren to head the CFPB via a recess appointment seem to be gaining traction. (WSJ.com).   Also, the CFPB has issued what appears to be its first guidance document.   The guidance clarifies that the Dodd-Frank requirements found in section 1071 will not go into effect until the CFPB issues regulations.  And what did Section 1071 do?  It amended the Equal Credit Opportunity Act to require financial institutions to collect and report information concerning credit applications made by women or minority-owned businesses and by small businesses.

1099.  Ding-dong, this witch is dead.  (NAFCU Today.) For months, we chronicled how a small provision in the recent health care reform law amended 1099-MISC requirements in a way that would have placed a huge new burden on businesses – including credit unions.  Luckily, reasonable minds came to the rescue. President Obama recently signed legislation into law that repeals that provision.

FDIC Complaint.  Here's another great blog post from the Bank Lawyer's Blog.  This post analyzes claims made by the FDIC against the former directors and officials of failed banks.  Here's one portion of the post that caught my eye:

In the case of Corn Belt Bank, which failed in 2009, the FDIC found five loans that caused losses to the bank ("Loss Loans"), alleged that the former directors and officers were negligent or grossly negligent in making the loans because they were improperly underwritten, and that the officers and directors breached their fiduciary duties to the bank. The former officers and directors failed to adequately inform themselves of the relevant risks and acted recklessly in approving them. In addition, the FDIC alleges undue loan concentration, out-of-area lending, high loan-to-value ratios, and overall weak loan administration. Finally, the FDIC alleges that regulatory examiners "repeatedly warned" the bank of these risks and the bank chose to ignore these warnings.

I really do see a sea change when it comes to boards, corporate governance and risk management.  When a financial institution's risk management program fails or is non-existent, directors won't be able to point their fingers at management and say, "That was their responsibility." When it comes to risk management and boards, it is becoming increasing clear that there is no "they" or "their."  

***

I wanted to key you all in to a NAFCU promotion.  Here's an ad you may have seen recently. 

We're urging non-members who are eligible to join NAFCU to consider trying us on for size with a free, no obligation 6 month trial.   If you enjoy the blog, I think you'd enjoy membership with NAFCU.  Take a look at what we offer and consider kicking the tires.  As I always like to say, free is good.