Net Worth and Equity Ratio, 60364-60367 [2011-24907]
Download as PDF
60364
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION
and three of the Stabilization Fund
Expenditures Act.
12 CFR Parts 700, 701, 702, 725, and
741
B. Proposed Rule
RIN 3133–AD87
Net Worth and Equity Ratio
National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
On January 4, 2011, President
Obama signed Senate Bill 4036 into law,
which, among other things, amended
the statutory definitions of ‘‘net worth’’
and ‘‘equity ratio’’ in the Federal Credit
Union Act. Through this final rule,
NCUA is making conforming
amendments to the definition of ‘‘net
worth’’ as it appears in NCUA’s Prompt
Corrective Action regulation and the
definition of ‘‘equity ratio’’ as it appears
in NCUA’s Requirements for Insurance
regulation. NCUA is also making
technical changes in other regulations to
ensure clarity and consistency in the
use of the term ‘‘net worth,’’ as it is
applied to federally-insured credit
unions.
SUMMARY:
This rule will become effective
on October 31, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Justin M. Anderson, Staff Attorney,
Office of General Counsel, at the above
address or telephone (703) 518–6540 or
Karen Kelbly, Chief Accountant, Office
of Examination and Insurance, at the
above address or telephone at 703–518–
6630.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
tkelley on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with RULES
A. Background
On January 4, 2011, President Obama
signed An Act to Clarify the National
Credit Union Administration Authority
to Make Stabilization Fund
Expenditures without Borrowing from
the Treasury (the Stabilization Fund
Expenditures Act) into law. S. 4036,
111th Cong., Public Law 111–382
(2011). The Stabilization Fund
Expenditures Act amended the Federal
Credit Union Act (the Act) by clarifying
NCUA’s authority to make stabilization
fund expenditures without borrowing
from the Treasury, amending the
definitions of ‘‘equity ratio’’ and ‘‘net
worth,’’ and requiring the Comptroller
General of the United States to conduct
a study on NCUA’s handling of the
recent corporate credit union crisis. The
Stabilization Fund Expenditures Act is
divided into four sections, and the
amendments in this rule implement the
changes made to the Act by sections two
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Sep 28, 2011
Jkt 223001
On March 17, 2011, the NCUA Board
(the Board) issued a proposed rule to
make conforming changes to the
definitions of ‘‘net worth’’ and ‘‘equity
ratio,’’ as those terms are used in
NCUA’s regulations. 76 FR 16345,
March 23, 2011. The Board also
proposed technical changes to the term
‘‘net worth’’ to ensure consistency and
accurate accounting treatment in
combination transactions. In response,
the Board received 15 comments: Two
from credit union trade associations;
one from a bank trade association; one
from a state bank league; four from state
credit union leagues; four from federal
credit unions; and three from federally
insured state chartered credit unions.
All of the commenters supported the
conforming changes to the definitions of
‘‘net worth’’ and ‘‘equity ratio,’’ but a
majority of the commenters disagreed
with the Board’s proposed technical
correction to the definition of net worth
in § 702.2(f)(3) of NCUA’s regulation.
The proposed technical change, which
addresses the acquisition of one credit
union by another, requires the
subtraction of any bargain purchase gain
from the acquired credit union’s
retained earnings when determining the
amount of regulatory capital add-on to
be included in the acquirer credit
union’s post acquisition net worth.
In addition, commenters also
addressed other points in the proposed
rule, including the differing definitions
of ‘‘net worth’’ in the Prompt Corrective
Action (PCA) and Member Business
Loan (MBL) regulations, the inclusion of
section 208 assistance in a credit
union’s net worth, and the public
disclosure of credit unions that receive
section 208 assistance. Below, the Board
discusses each of the topics addressed
by the commenters.
C. Summary of Comments
1. Technical Change To ‘‘Net Worth’’
Eleven commenters objected to
NCUA’s technical change to the
definition of ‘‘net worth’’ in a
combination transaction as set forth in
proposed § 702.2(f)(3). The proposed
change requires the subtraction of any
bargain purchase gain from an acquired
credit union’s retained earnings before
the latter amount is included in the net
worth of the acquiring credit union.
This proposed correction also limits the
difference between the added retained
earnings and bargain purchase gain to
an amount that is zero or more, which
would prevent a retained earnings
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
deficit from flowing forward to the
acquiring institution. Finally, this
proposed revision adds a requirement
that the retained earnings of the
acquired credit union at the point of
acquisition be measured under
Generally Accepted Accounting
Procedures (GAAP) as referenced in the
Act. 12 U.S.C. 1790d(o)(2)(A).
All of the commenters objecting to
this change cited at least one of three
reasons. First, six commenters believed
this change would have a chilling effect
or act as a disincentive to credit unions
interested in merging. The Board,
however, notes that most mergers will
be unaffected by this change. For the
majority of credit union mergers, the
resulting component is in the form of
goodwill rather than bargain purchase
gain. In those situations, this change
will have no effect on the transaction.
For those few mergers that this change
will impact, the Board believes the
impact will be minimal and will not
create any disincentive to mergers as it
duplicates the regulatory capital result
achieved under the old pooling method.
In responding to these comments,
NCUA staff looked at recent mergers to
evaluate the impact this change would
have had on those transactions. Of the
mergers reviewed, which resulted in a
bargain purchase gain, none would have
resulted in a significant decrease in net
worth because of the technical
correction. To illustrate this point, the
Board notes that, of the mergers
reviewed, the sharpest decline in net
worth was from a net worth of 12.93%
under the current rule to a net worth of
12.46% with the technical correction.
Second, six commenters also stated
that this change is contrary to GAAP
and would put acquiring credit unions
in a worse financial position than they
otherwise would have been had the
transaction been accounted for under
GAAP. The Board agrees with
commenters that GAAP should govern
the financial reporting of merger
transactions and notes that this
technical correction does not change the
requirement for credit unions to report
merger transactions in accordance with
GAAP. This technical correction
ensures that an acquiring credit union’s
regulatory capital does not achieve a
double benefit through a bargain
purchase gain, which is not contrary to
GAAP accounting.
Finally, eight commenters stated that
this change is contrary to the purpose
and intent of the 2006 Financial
Services Relief Act (2006 Relief Act).
The 2006 Relief Act amended the FCU
Act by defining ‘‘net worth’’ as
including ‘‘the retained earnings
balance of the credit union, as
E:\FR\FM\29SER1.SGM
29SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
determined under generally accepted
accounting procedures, together with
any amounts that were previously
retained earnings of any credit union
with which the credit union has
combined.’’ Public Law 709–351,
section 504 (2006), 12 U.S.C.
1790d(o)(2)(A). The expanded definition
permitted the acquiring credit union to
‘‘follow the new Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) rule while still
allowing the capital of both credit
unions to flow forward as regulatory
capital and thus preserve the incentive
for desirable credit union mergers.’’
Staff of Senate Comm. on Banking,
Housing and Urban Affairs, 109th Cong.,
Section-By-Section Analysis of
Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act
of 2006 (Comm. Print 2006) at 3. By
duplicating the regulatory capital
measure previously obtained under the
pooling method of accounting, the 2006
Relief Act eliminated the regulatory
capital disincentive caused by changes
to the FASB rules. The technical change
60365
proposed by the Board retains the
forward flow of the capital of both the
acquired and acquiring credit unions,
but removes the double counting of the
acquired credit union’s capital caused
by the accounting treatment of bargain
purchase gain. The Board’s proposed
technical correction, therefore, is
consistent with Congress’ objective in
the 2006 Relief Act. The following
hypothetical example illustrates how
the technical correction is in line with
Congress’ intent:
TABLE 1—HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE
Target’s balance sheet
Book value
Assets ......................................................................................................................................................................
Liabilities ..................................................................................................................................................................
Equity:
Retained Earnings ............................................................................................................................................
Acquired Equity ................................................................................................................................................
Bargain Purchase Gain ....................................................................................................................................
Liabilities & Equity ...................................................................................................................................................
Acquirer’s Retained Earnings ..................................................................................................................................
Fair value
$475,000
348,000
$500,000
350,000
127,000
........................
........................
475,000
250,000
........................
125,000
25,000
500,000
........................
TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF ACQUIRER’S REGULATORY CAPITAL OUTCOMES
Under old
pooling
Acquirer’s Retained Earnings Under GAAP ................................................................................
Target’s Regulatory Capital Add-on:
PreMerger Retained Earnings ..............................................................................................
Less: Bargain Purchase Gain ..............................................................................................
Net Worth (Regulatory Capital) ...................................................................................................
tkelley on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Based on the discussion above and for
the reasons articulated in the proposed
rule (see 76 FR 16345, March 23, 2011),
the Board is retaining the technical
change in this final rule that requires
the subtraction of any bargain purchase
gain from the acquired credit union’s
retained earnings before the latter
amount is included in the acquirer’s net
worth. A technical change to a reference
in Part 725 is also made due to a
realignment of definitions in Part 700.
2. Consistent Definition of ‘‘Net Worth’’
Four commenters objected to the use
of a different definition of ‘‘net worth’’
in the MBL and PCA regulations. These
commenters stated that the differing
definitions were unfair and would likely
cause confusion among credit unions.
As noted in the proposed rule, the
differing definitions are based on the
definitions of ‘‘net worth’’ used in the
sections of the Act addressing MBLs and
PCA. See 76 FR 16345, March 23, 2011
and 12 U.S.C. 1757a(c)(2) and
1790d(o)(2). The differing definitions of
net worth for MBLs and PCA in NCUA’s
regulations reflect the corresponding
differing definitions in the Act. As such,
the Board cannot use the same
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Sep 28, 2011
Jkt 223001
definition of ‘‘net worth’’ in the MBL
and PCA regulations without a statutory
change.
3. Clarification of Section 208
Assistance
The Board received four comments
seeking clarification on when 208
assistance can be counted as net worth.
Section 208 of the Act allows the Board,
in its discretion, to make loans to, or
purchase the assets of, or establish
accounts in insured credit unions the
Board has determined are in danger of
closing or in order to assist in the
voluntary liquidation of a solvent credit
union. 12 U.S.C. 1788(a)(1). Two
commenters stated that it was Congress’
intent to limit when section 208
assistance may be counted as net worth
to only those situations when the Board
provides the assistance to facilitate a
merger between a healthy and a failed
credit union. These commenters cited a
portion of the Stabilization Fund
Expenditures Act, which states that
section 208 assistance may be counted
as net worth when it is provided by the
Board ‘‘to facilitate a least cost
resolution.’’ 111 Public Law 382, 124
Stat. 4134 (2011). These commenters
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Under current
rule w/BPG
With technical
amendment
$250,000
$275,000
$275,000
127,000
........................
377,000
127,000
........................
402,000
127,000
(25,000)
377,000
believe that the phrase ‘‘facilitate a least
cost resolution’’ limits when section 208
assistance may be considered net worth
to only those situations where it is
provided to facilitate a merger. In
contrast, two other commenters stated
that section 208 assistance counted as
net worth should not be restricted to
only those situations involving a
merger. These other commenters also
cited the statutory amendments and
argued that the Stabilization Fund
Expenditures Act does not contain
explicit limitations on when section 208
assistance can be included in a credit
unions net worth, but rather provides
the Board with a high level of discretion
on when to use section 208 assistance
as net worth. Id.
After considering the comments and
revisiting the language of the statutory
amendments, the Board concurs with
the commenters who stated that section
208 assistance as net worth should not
be limited to only those instances when
a merger is involved. As those
commenters pointed out, there is
nothing in the statutory change that
states that section 208 assistance can
only be counted as net worth when a
E:\FR\FM\29SER1.SGM
29SER1
60366
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
merger is involved. In fact, when read
as a whole, the Act, as amended by the
Stabilization Fund Expenditures Act,
addresses net worth in the context of a
merger and in the context of section 208
assistance in different sections.
Specifically, section 216(o)(2)(A) of the
Act defines net worth of a credit union
in a combination transaction and
section 216(o)(2)(B) of the Act
separately defines net worth with
respect to section 208 assistance. 12
U.S.C. 1790d(o)(2)(A) and (B). The
Board believes that this statutory
construction as well as the absence of
limiting language in the Stabilization
Fund Expenditures Act supports the
conclusion that defining section 208
assistance as net worth is not limited to
situations only involving a merger. The
Board, therefore, is clarifying that
section 208 assistance can be counted in
a credit union’s net worth subject only
to those limitations contained in the
rule text and is not limited only to
merger transactions.
4. Section 208 Assistance on the 5300
Finally, three commenters requested
that NCUA include a separate line item
on the 5300 Call Report for reporting
section 208 assistance received by a
credit union. These commenters cited
transparency and accountability as
reasons for the inclusion of section 208
assistance on the 5300 Call Report.
NCUA has previously declined to make
information about credit unions
receiving section 208 assistance public
because there is a strong possibility that
members may perceive receipt of
section 208 assistance to indicate a
weak and unstable credit union.
Further, this information would also be
exempt from public disclosure pursuant
to Exemption 8 of the FOIA.1 While the
Board is dedicated to transparency in its
operations, this dedication must also be
balanced with the safety and soundness
of the credit union industry. As such,
the Board continues to agree with this
rationale for not publicly releasing
information on credit unions that
receive section 208 assistance and will
not include a separate line item on the
5300 Call Report for the disclosure of
section 208 assistance.
Regulatory Procedures
tkelley on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires NCUA to prepare an analysis to
1 Exemption 8 of the FOIA exempts from
disclosure information contained in or related to
examination, operating, or condition reports
prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an
agency responsible for the regulation or supervision
of financial institutions. 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(8).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Sep 28, 2011
Jkt 223001
describe any significant economic
impact a proposed rule may have on a
substantial number of small credit
unions (those under $10 million in
assets). This final rule modifies the
definition of ‘‘net worth’’ and ‘‘equity
ratio,’’ and will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small credit unions and a
regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996, Public Law 104–121, provides
generally for congressional review of
agency rules. A reporting requirement is
triggered in instances where NCUA
issues a final rule as defined by Section
551 of the Administrative Procedures
Act. 5 U.S.C. 551. The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, an
office within the Office of Management
and Budget, is currently reviewing this
rule, and NCUA anticipates it will
determine that, for purposes of SBREFA,
this is not a major rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
NCUA has determined that the final
amendments will not increase
paperwork requirements and a
paperwork reduction analysis is not
required.
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 encourages
independent regulatory agencies to
consider the impact of their actions on
state and local interests. In adherence to
fundamental federalism principles,
NCUA, an independent regulatory
agency as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5),
voluntarily complies with the executive
order. The final rule would not have
substantial direct effects on the states,
on the connection between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. NCUA has
determined that this final rule does not
constitute a policy that has federalism
implications for purposes of the
executive order.
The Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999—Assessment
of Federal Regulations and Policies on
Families
NCUA has determined that this
proposed rule would not affect family
well-being within the meaning of
section 654 of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999,
Public Law 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681
(1998).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Parts 700,
701, 702, 725, and 741
Bank deposit insurance, Credit, Credit
unions, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
By the National Credit Union
Administration Board on September 22,
2011.
Mary Rupp,
Secretary of the Board.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the National Credit Union
Administration amends 12 CFR parts
700, 701, 702, 725, and 742 as set forth
below:
PART 700—DEFINITIONS
1. The authority citation for part 700
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1752, 1757(6) and
1766.
2. In § 700.2:
a. Remove the alphabetical paragraph
designations,and add in alphabetical
order a definition for ‘‘net worth’’; and
■ b. In the definition of ‘‘insolvency,’’
transfer paragraph designation (1) to
follow the term.
The addition reads as follows:
■
■
§ 700.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Net worth. Unless otherwise noted,
the term ‘‘net worth,’’ as applied to
credit unions, has the same meaning as
set forth in § 702.2(f) of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 701—ORGANIZATION AND
OPERATION OF FEDERAL CREDIT
UNIONS
3. The authority citation for part 701
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1752(5), 1755, 1756,
1757, 1758, 1759, 1761a, 1761b, 1766, 1767,
1782, 1784, 1786, 1787, 1789. Section 701.6
is also authorized by 15 U.S.C. 3717. Section
701.31 is also authorized by 15 U.S.C. 1601
et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 3601–3610.
Section 701.35 is also authorized by 42
U.S.C. 4311–4312.
4. Revise § 701.21(h)(4)(iv) to read as
follows:
■
§ 701.21 Loans to members and lines of
credit to members.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(4) * * *
(iv) The term ‘‘net worth’’ means the
retained earnings balance of the credit
union at quarter end as determined
under generally accepted accounting
principles and as further defined in
§ 702.2(f) of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\29SER1.SGM
29SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
PART 702—PROMPT CORRECTIVE
ACTION
paragraph (1) to the definition of
‘‘insolvency in § 700.2’’.
5. The authority citation for part 702
continues to read as follows:
PART 741—REQUIREMENTS FOR
INSURANCE
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1766(a), 1790(d).
6. In 702.2, revise paragraph (f)(3) and
add paragraph (f)(4) to read as follows:
■
§ 702.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(3) For a credit union that acquires
another credit union in a mutual
combination, net worth includes the
retained earnings of the acquired credit
union, or of an integrated set of
activities and assets, less any bargain
purchase gain recognized in either case
to the extent the difference between the
two is greater than zero. The acquired
retained earnings must be determined at
the point of acquisition under generally
accepted accounting principles. A
mutual combination is a transaction in
which a credit union acquires another
credit union or acquires an integrated
set of activities and assets that is
capable of being conducted and
managed as a credit union.
(4) The term ‘‘net worth’’ also
includes loans to and accounts in an
insured credit union established
pursuant to section 208 of the Act [12
U.S.C. 1788], provided such loans and
accounts:
(i) Have a remaining maturity of more
than 5 years;
(ii) Are subordinate to all other claims
including those of shareholders,
creditors and the National Credit Union
Share Insurance Fund;
(iii) Are not pledged as security on a
loan to, or other obligation of, any party;
(iv) Are not insured by the National
Credit Union Share Insurance Fund;
(v) Have non-cumulative dividends;
(vi) Are transferable; and
(vii) Are available to cover operating
losses realized by the insured credit
union that exceed its available retained
earnings.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 725—NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL
LIQUIDITY FACILITY
7. The authority citation for part 725
continues to read as follows:
tkelley on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with RULES
■
Authority: Secs. 301–307 Federal Credit
Union Act, 92 Stat. 3719–3722 (12 U.S.C.
1795–1795f).
§ 725.18
[Amended]
8. In § 725.18, amend paragraph (c) by
removing the words ‘‘by § 700.2(e)(1)’’
and adding in its place the words ‘‘in
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Sep 28, 2011
Jkt 223001
9. The authority citation for part 741
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1757, 1766(a), 1781–
1790, and 1790d; 31 U.S.C. 3717.
10. In § 741.4, in paragraph (b), revise
the introductory text to the definition of
‘‘equity ratio’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 741.4 Insurance premium and one
percent deposit.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
Equity ratio, which shall be calculated
using the financial statements of the
NCUSIF alone, without any
consolidation or combination with the
financial statements of any other fund or
entity, means the ratio of:
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–24907 Filed 9–28–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2009–0218; Directorate
Identifier 2009–CE–006–AD; Amendment
39–16820; AD 2009–13–06 R1]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Piper
Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are revising an existing
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Piper Aircraft, Inc. Models PA–23, PA–
23–160, PA–23–235, PA–23–250, PA–
23–250 (Navy UO–1), PA–E23–250, PA–
31, PA–31–300, PA–31–325, PA–31–
350, PA–31P, PA–31P–350, PA–31T,
PA–31T1, PA–31T2, PA–31T3, PA–42,
PA–42–720, and PA–42–1000 airplanes
that are equipped with a baggage door
in the fuselage nose section (a nose
baggage door). That AD currently
establishes life limits and replacement
requirements for safety-critical nose
baggage door components and repetitive
inspections and lubrication of the nose
baggage door latching mechanism and
lock assembly. This new AD removes
the requirement for the nose baggage
door compartment interior light
inspection and retains the other
requirements from AD 2009–13–06,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60367
Amendment 39–15944. This AD was
prompted by further investigation and a
request for an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC). We are issuing
this AD to correct the unsafe condition
on these products.
DATES: This AD is effective November 3,
2011.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in this AD
as of July 24, 2009 (74 FR 29118, June
19, 2009).
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this AD, contact Piper
Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero
Beach, Florida 32960; telephone: (772)
567–4361; fax: (772) 978–6573; Internet:
https://www.newpiper.com/company/
publications.asp. You may review
copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA,
call (816) 329–4148.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is
Document Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory K. Noles, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification
Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College
Park, Georgia 30337; telephone: (404)
474–5551; fax: (404) 474–5606; e-mail:
gregory.noles@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to revise AD 2009–13–06,
amendment 39–15944 (74 FR 29118,
June 19, 2009). That AD applies to the
specified products. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on
May 20, 2011 (76 FR 29176). That
NPRM proposed to continue to require
establishment of life limits for safetycritical nose baggage door components.
That NPRM also proposed to continue
to require replacement of those safetycritical nose baggage door components
E:\FR\FM\29SER1.SGM
29SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60364-60367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24907]
[[Page 60364]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Parts 700, 701, 702, 725, and 741
RIN 3133-AD87
Net Worth and Equity Ratio
AGENCY: National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On January 4, 2011, President Obama signed Senate Bill 4036
into law, which, among other things, amended the statutory definitions
of ``net worth'' and ``equity ratio'' in the Federal Credit Union Act.
Through this final rule, NCUA is making conforming amendments to the
definition of ``net worth'' as it appears in NCUA's Prompt Corrective
Action regulation and the definition of ``equity ratio'' as it appears
in NCUA's Requirements for Insurance regulation. NCUA is also making
technical changes in other regulations to ensure clarity and
consistency in the use of the term ``net worth,'' as it is applied to
federally-insured credit unions.
DATES: This rule will become effective on October 31, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Justin M. Anderson, Staff Attorney,
Office of General Counsel, at the above address or telephone (703) 518-
6540 or Karen Kelbly, Chief Accountant, Office of Examination and
Insurance, at the above address or telephone at 703-518-6630.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On January 4, 2011, President Obama signed An Act to Clarify the
National Credit Union Administration Authority to Make Stabilization
Fund Expenditures without Borrowing from the Treasury (the
Stabilization Fund Expenditures Act) into law. S. 4036, 111th Cong.,
Public Law 111-382 (2011). The Stabilization Fund Expenditures Act
amended the Federal Credit Union Act (the Act) by clarifying NCUA's
authority to make stabilization fund expenditures without borrowing
from the Treasury, amending the definitions of ``equity ratio'' and
``net worth,'' and requiring the Comptroller General of the United
States to conduct a study on NCUA's handling of the recent corporate
credit union crisis. The Stabilization Fund Expenditures Act is divided
into four sections, and the amendments in this rule implement the
changes made to the Act by sections two and three of the Stabilization
Fund Expenditures Act.
B. Proposed Rule
On March 17, 2011, the NCUA Board (the Board) issued a proposed
rule to make conforming changes to the definitions of ``net worth'' and
``equity ratio,'' as those terms are used in NCUA's regulations. 76 FR
16345, March 23, 2011. The Board also proposed technical changes to the
term ``net worth'' to ensure consistency and accurate accounting
treatment in combination transactions. In response, the Board received
15 comments: Two from credit union trade associations; one from a bank
trade association; one from a state bank league; four from state credit
union leagues; four from federal credit unions; and three from
federally insured state chartered credit unions. All of the commenters
supported the conforming changes to the definitions of ``net worth''
and ``equity ratio,'' but a majority of the commenters disagreed with
the Board's proposed technical correction to the definition of net
worth in Sec. 702.2(f)(3) of NCUA's regulation. The proposed technical
change, which addresses the acquisition of one credit union by another,
requires the subtraction of any bargain purchase gain from the acquired
credit union's retained earnings when determining the amount of
regulatory capital add-on to be included in the acquirer credit union's
post acquisition net worth.
In addition, commenters also addressed other points in the proposed
rule, including the differing definitions of ``net worth'' in the
Prompt Corrective Action (PCA) and Member Business Loan (MBL)
regulations, the inclusion of section 208 assistance in a credit
union's net worth, and the public disclosure of credit unions that
receive section 208 assistance. Below, the Board discusses each of the
topics addressed by the commenters.
C. Summary of Comments
1. Technical Change To ``Net Worth''
Eleven commenters objected to NCUA's technical change to the
definition of ``net worth'' in a combination transaction as set forth
in proposed Sec. 702.2(f)(3). The proposed change requires the
subtraction of any bargain purchase gain from an acquired credit
union's retained earnings before the latter amount is included in the
net worth of the acquiring credit union. This proposed correction also
limits the difference between the added retained earnings and bargain
purchase gain to an amount that is zero or more, which would prevent a
retained earnings deficit from flowing forward to the acquiring
institution. Finally, this proposed revision adds a requirement that
the retained earnings of the acquired credit union at the point of
acquisition be measured under Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures
(GAAP) as referenced in the Act. 12 U.S.C. 1790d(o)(2)(A).
All of the commenters objecting to this change cited at least one
of three reasons. First, six commenters believed this change would have
a chilling effect or act as a disincentive to credit unions interested
in merging. The Board, however, notes that most mergers will be
unaffected by this change. For the majority of credit union mergers,
the resulting component is in the form of goodwill rather than bargain
purchase gain. In those situations, this change will have no effect on
the transaction. For those few mergers that this change will impact,
the Board believes the impact will be minimal and will not create any
disincentive to mergers as it duplicates the regulatory capital result
achieved under the old pooling method. In responding to these comments,
NCUA staff looked at recent mergers to evaluate the impact this change
would have had on those transactions. Of the mergers reviewed, which
resulted in a bargain purchase gain, none would have resulted in a
significant decrease in net worth because of the technical correction.
To illustrate this point, the Board notes that, of the mergers
reviewed, the sharpest decline in net worth was from a net worth of
12.93% under the current rule to a net worth of 12.46% with the
technical correction.
Second, six commenters also stated that this change is contrary to
GAAP and would put acquiring credit unions in a worse financial
position than they otherwise would have been had the transaction been
accounted for under GAAP. The Board agrees with commenters that GAAP
should govern the financial reporting of merger transactions and notes
that this technical correction does not change the requirement for
credit unions to report merger transactions in accordance with GAAP.
This technical correction ensures that an acquiring credit union's
regulatory capital does not achieve a double benefit through a bargain
purchase gain, which is not contrary to GAAP accounting.
Finally, eight commenters stated that this change is contrary to
the purpose and intent of the 2006 Financial Services Relief Act (2006
Relief Act). The 2006 Relief Act amended the FCU Act by defining ``net
worth'' as including ``the retained earnings balance of the credit
union, as
[[Page 60365]]
determined under generally accepted accounting procedures, together
with any amounts that were previously retained earnings of any credit
union with which the credit union has combined.'' Public Law 709-351,
section 504 (2006), 12 U.S.C. 1790d(o)(2)(A). The expanded definition
permitted the acquiring credit union to ``follow the new Financial
Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rule while still allowing the capital
of both credit unions to flow forward as regulatory capital and thus
preserve the incentive for desirable credit union mergers.'' Staff of
Senate Comm. on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, 109th Cong.,
Section-By-Section Analysis of Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act
of 2006 (Comm. Print 2006) at 3. By duplicating the regulatory capital
measure previously obtained under the pooling method of accounting, the
2006 Relief Act eliminated the regulatory capital disincentive caused
by changes to the FASB rules. The technical change proposed by the
Board retains the forward flow of the capital of both the acquired and
acquiring credit unions, but removes the double counting of the
acquired credit union's capital caused by the accounting treatment of
bargain purchase gain. The Board's proposed technical correction,
therefore, is consistent with Congress' objective in the 2006 Relief
Act. The following hypothetical example illustrates how the technical
correction is in line with Congress' intent:
Table 1--Hypothetical Example
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target's balance sheet Book value Fair value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assets.................................. $475,000 $500,000
Liabilities............................. 348,000 350,000
Equity: .............. ..............
Retained Earnings................... 127,000 ..............
Acquired Equity..................... .............. 125,000
Bargain Purchase Gain............... .............. 25,000
Liabilities & Equity.................... 475,000 500,000
Acquirer's Retained Earnings............ 250,000 ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Comparison of Acquirer's Regulatory Capital Outcomes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under old Under current With technical
pooling rule w/BPG amendment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acquirer's Retained Earnings Under GAAP......................... $250,000 $275,000 $275,000
Target's Regulatory Capital Add-on: .............. .............. ..............
PreMerger Retained Earnings................................. 127,000 127,000 127,000
Less: Bargain Purchase Gain................................. .............. .............. (25,000)
Net Worth (Regulatory Capital).................................. 377,000 402,000 377,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the discussion above and for the reasons articulated in
the proposed rule (see 76 FR 16345, March 23, 2011), the Board is
retaining the technical change in this final rule that requires the
subtraction of any bargain purchase gain from the acquired credit
union's retained earnings before the latter amount is included in the
acquirer's net worth. A technical change to a reference in Part 725 is
also made due to a realignment of definitions in Part 700.
2. Consistent Definition of ``Net Worth''
Four commenters objected to the use of a different definition of
``net worth'' in the MBL and PCA regulations. These commenters stated
that the differing definitions were unfair and would likely cause
confusion among credit unions. As noted in the proposed rule, the
differing definitions are based on the definitions of ``net worth''
used in the sections of the Act addressing MBLs and PCA. See 76 FR
16345, March 23, 2011 and 12 U.S.C. 1757a(c)(2) and 1790d(o)(2). The
differing definitions of net worth for MBLs and PCA in NCUA's
regulations reflect the corresponding differing definitions in the Act.
As such, the Board cannot use the same definition of ``net worth'' in
the MBL and PCA regulations without a statutory change.
3. Clarification of Section 208 Assistance
The Board received four comments seeking clarification on when 208
assistance can be counted as net worth. Section 208 of the Act allows
the Board, in its discretion, to make loans to, or purchase the assets
of, or establish accounts in insured credit unions the Board has
determined are in danger of closing or in order to assist in the
voluntary liquidation of a solvent credit union. 12 U.S.C. 1788(a)(1).
Two commenters stated that it was Congress' intent to limit when
section 208 assistance may be counted as net worth to only those
situations when the Board provides the assistance to facilitate a
merger between a healthy and a failed credit union. These commenters
cited a portion of the Stabilization Fund Expenditures Act, which
states that section 208 assistance may be counted as net worth when it
is provided by the Board ``to facilitate a least cost resolution.'' 111
Public Law 382, 124 Stat. 4134 (2011). These commenters believe that
the phrase ``facilitate a least cost resolution'' limits when section
208 assistance may be considered net worth to only those situations
where it is provided to facilitate a merger. In contrast, two other
commenters stated that section 208 assistance counted as net worth
should not be restricted to only those situations involving a merger.
These other commenters also cited the statutory amendments and argued
that the Stabilization Fund Expenditures Act does not contain explicit
limitations on when section 208 assistance can be included in a credit
unions net worth, but rather provides the Board with a high level of
discretion on when to use section 208 assistance as net worth. Id.
After considering the comments and revisiting the language of the
statutory amendments, the Board concurs with the commenters who stated
that section 208 assistance as net worth should not be limited to only
those instances when a merger is involved. As those commenters pointed
out, there is nothing in the statutory change that states that section
208 assistance can only be counted as net worth when a
[[Page 60366]]
merger is involved. In fact, when read as a whole, the Act, as amended
by the Stabilization Fund Expenditures Act, addresses net worth in the
context of a merger and in the context of section 208 assistance in
different sections. Specifically, section 216(o)(2)(A) of the Act
defines net worth of a credit union in a combination transaction and
section 216(o)(2)(B) of the Act separately defines net worth with
respect to section 208 assistance. 12 U.S.C. 1790d(o)(2)(A) and (B).
The Board believes that this statutory construction as well as the
absence of limiting language in the Stabilization Fund Expenditures Act
supports the conclusion that defining section 208 assistance as net
worth is not limited to situations only involving a merger. The Board,
therefore, is clarifying that section 208 assistance can be counted in
a credit union's net worth subject only to those limitations contained
in the rule text and is not limited only to merger transactions.
4. Section 208 Assistance on the 5300
Finally, three commenters requested that NCUA include a separate
line item on the 5300 Call Report for reporting section 208 assistance
received by a credit union. These commenters cited transparency and
accountability as reasons for the inclusion of section 208 assistance
on the 5300 Call Report. NCUA has previously declined to make
information about credit unions receiving section 208 assistance public
because there is a strong possibility that members may perceive receipt
of section 208 assistance to indicate a weak and unstable credit union.
Further, this information would also be exempt from public disclosure
pursuant to Exemption 8 of the FOIA.\1\ While the Board is dedicated to
transparency in its operations, this dedication must also be balanced
with the safety and soundness of the credit union industry. As such,
the Board continues to agree with this rationale for not publicly
releasing information on credit unions that receive section 208
assistance and will not include a separate line item on the 5300 Call
Report for the disclosure of section 208 assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Exemption 8 of the FOIA exempts from disclosure information
contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition
reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency
responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial
institutions. 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Procedures
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires NCUA to prepare an analysis
to describe any significant economic impact a proposed rule may have on
a substantial number of small credit unions (those under $10 million in
assets). This final rule modifies the definition of ``net worth'' and
``equity ratio,'' and will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small credit unions and a regulatory flexibility
analysis is not required.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996, Public Law 104-121, provides generally for congressional review
of agency rules. A reporting requirement is triggered in instances
where NCUA issues a final rule as defined by Section 551 of the
Administrative Procedures Act. 5 U.S.C. 551. The Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, an office within the Office of Management and
Budget, is currently reviewing this rule, and NCUA anticipates it will
determine that, for purposes of SBREFA, this is not a major rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
NCUA has determined that the final amendments will not increase
paperwork requirements and a paperwork reduction analysis is not
required.
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 encourages independent regulatory agencies to
consider the impact of their actions on state and local interests. In
adherence to fundamental federalism principles, NCUA, an independent
regulatory agency as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5), voluntarily complies
with the executive order. The final rule would not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the connection between the national
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. NCUA has
determined that this final rule does not constitute a policy that has
federalism implications for purposes of the executive order.
The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999--
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
NCUA has determined that this proposed rule would not affect family
well-being within the meaning of section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act, 1999, Public Law 105-277, 112
Stat. 2681 (1998).
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Parts 700, 701, 702, 725, and 741
Bank deposit insurance, Credit, Credit unions, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
By the National Credit Union Administration Board on September
22, 2011.
Mary Rupp,
Secretary of the Board.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the National Credit Union
Administration amends 12 CFR parts 700, 701, 702, 725, and 742 as set
forth below:
PART 700--DEFINITIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 700 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1752, 1757(6) and 1766.
0
2. In Sec. 700.2:
0
a. Remove the alphabetical paragraph designations,and add in
alphabetical order a definition for ``net worth''; and
0
b. In the definition of ``insolvency,'' transfer paragraph designation
(1) to follow the term.
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 700.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Net worth. Unless otherwise noted, the term ``net worth,'' as
applied to credit unions, has the same meaning as set forth in Sec.
702.2(f) of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 701--ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION OF FEDERAL CREDIT UNIONS
0
3. The authority citation for part 701 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1752(5), 1755, 1756, 1757, 1758, 1759,
1761a, 1761b, 1766, 1767, 1782, 1784, 1786, 1787, 1789. Section
701.6 is also authorized by 15 U.S.C. 3717. Section 701.31 is also
authorized by 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 3601-3610.
Section 701.35 is also authorized by 42 U.S.C. 4311-4312.
0
4. Revise Sec. 701.21(h)(4)(iv) to read as follows:
Sec. 701.21 Loans to members and lines of credit to members.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(4) * * *
(iv) The term ``net worth'' means the retained earnings balance of
the credit union at quarter end as determined under generally accepted
accounting principles and as further defined in Sec. 702.2(f) of this
chapter.
* * * * *
[[Page 60367]]
PART 702--PROMPT CORRECTIVE ACTION
0
5. The authority citation for part 702 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1766(a), 1790(d).
0
6. In 702.2, revise paragraph (f)(3) and add paragraph (f)(4) to read
as follows:
Sec. 702.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(3) For a credit union that acquires another credit union in a
mutual combination, net worth includes the retained earnings of the
acquired credit union, or of an integrated set of activities and
assets, less any bargain purchase gain recognized in either case to the
extent the difference between the two is greater than zero. The
acquired retained earnings must be determined at the point of
acquisition under generally accepted accounting principles. A mutual
combination is a transaction in which a credit union acquires another
credit union or acquires an integrated set of activities and assets
that is capable of being conducted and managed as a credit union.
(4) The term ``net worth'' also includes loans to and accounts in
an insured credit union established pursuant to section 208 of the Act
[12 U.S.C. 1788], provided such loans and accounts:
(i) Have a remaining maturity of more than 5 years;
(ii) Are subordinate to all other claims including those of
shareholders, creditors and the National Credit Union Share Insurance
Fund;
(iii) Are not pledged as security on a loan to, or other obligation
of, any party;
(iv) Are not insured by the National Credit Union Share Insurance
Fund;
(v) Have non-cumulative dividends;
(vi) Are transferable; and
(vii) Are available to cover operating losses realized by the
insured credit union that exceed its available retained earnings.
* * * * *
PART 725--NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL LIQUIDITY
FACILITY
0
7. The authority citation for part 725 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 301-307 Federal Credit Union Act, 92 Stat.
3719-3722 (12 U.S.C. 1795-1795f).
Sec. 725.18 [Amended]
0
8. In Sec. 725.18, amend paragraph (c) by removing the words ``by
Sec. 700.2(e)(1)'' and adding in its place the words ``in paragraph
(1) to the definition of ``insolvency in Sec. 700.2''.
PART 741--REQUIREMENTS FOR INSURANCE
0
9. The authority citation for part 741 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1757, 1766(a), 1781-1790, and 1790d; 31
U.S.C. 3717.
0
10. In Sec. 741.4, in paragraph (b), revise the introductory text to
the definition of ``equity ratio'' to read as follows:
Sec. 741.4 Insurance premium and one percent deposit.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Equity ratio, which shall be calculated using the financial
statements of the NCUSIF alone, without any consolidation or
combination with the financial statements of any other fund or entity,
means the ratio of:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-24907 Filed 9-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-P