Collection and Transmission of Annual AMC Registry Fees, 44493-44502 [2017-20400]
Download as PDF
44493
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 82, No. 184
Monday, September 25, 2017
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Office of the Secretary
6 CFR Chapter I
Temporary Extension of Applicability
of Regulations Governing Conduct on
Federal Property
Office of the Secretary,
Department of Homeland Security.
ACTION: Notification of temporary
extension of the applicability of
regulations.
AGENCY:
The Acting Secretary of
Homeland Security, pursuant to the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, has
temporarily extended the applicability
of certain regulations governing conduct
on federal property to certain areas
within the United States Border Patrol’s
San Diego Sector allowing for their
enforcement. This temporary
administrative extension enables the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) to protect and secure Federal
property at or near the project areas for
border wall prototypes and fence
replacement near the city of San Diego,
including but not limited to, project
sites, staging areas, access roads, and
buildings temporarily erected to support
construction activities and to carry out
its statutory obligations to protect and
secure the nation’s borders. The project
areas for border wall prototype and
fence replacement are situated within a
geographic area that starts at the Pacific
Ocean and extends to approximately
one mile east of Border Monument 251.
DATES: Pursuant to 40 U.S.C. 1315(d),
the extension began on September 19,
2017 and will continue for the duration
of the construction activities related to
the fence replacement and border wall
prototype projects near the city of San
Diego.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joshua A. Vayer, Division Director,
Protective Operations Division, Federal
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
Protective Service, joshua.s.vayer@
hq.dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Pursuant to section 1706 of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, 40
U.S.C. 1315(a); Public Law 107–296, 116
Stat. 2135 (Nov. 25, 2002), the Secretary
of Homeland Security is responsible for
protecting the buildings, grounds, and
property owned, occupied, or secured
by the Federal Government (including
any agency, instrumentality, or wholly
owned or mixed ownership corporation
thereof) and the persons on the
property. To carry out this mandate, the
Department is authorized to enforce the
applicable Federal regulations for the
protection of persons and property set
forth in 41 CFR 102–74, subpart C.1
These regulations govern conduct on
federal property and set forth the
relevant criminal penalties. Although
these regulations apply to all property
under the authority of the General
Services Administration and to all
person entering in or on such property,2
the Secretary of Homeland Security is
authorized pursuant to 40 U.S.C.
1315(d)(2)(A) to extend the applicability
of and to enforce these regulations to
any property owned or occupied by the
Federal Government.
Temporary Extension of Applicability
of Regulations Governing Conduct on
Federal Property to Certain Areas in
the Vicinity of the Border Near the City
of San Diego
DHS is replacing existing border fence
with bollard wall and constructing
border wall prototypes near the city of
San Diego in the United States Border
Patrol’s San Diego Sector pursuant to
several statutory and executive
directives.3 In order to protect and
1 Although these regulations were issued prior to
the Homeland Security Act, per section 1512 of the
Act, these regulations remain the relevant
regulations for purposes of the protection and
administration of property owned or occupied by
the Federal Government.
2 See 41 CFR 102–74.365.
3 The statutory and executive directives relating
to the construction of the border wall prototypes
include, but are not limited to, section 102 of the
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act of 1996, Public Law 104–208,
Div. C, 110 Stat. 3009–546, 3009–554 (Sept. 30,
1996) (8 U.S.C. 1103 note), as amended by the
REAL ID Act of 2005, Public Law 109–13, Div. B,
119 Stat. 231, 302, 306 (May 11, 2005) (8 U.S.C.
1103 note), as amended by the Secure Fence Act of
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
secure the property at or near the border
wall prototype and fence replacement
project areas, including, but not limited
to, project sites, staging areas, access
roads, and buildings temporarily erected
to support construction activities, I
temporarily extended the applicability,
allowing the enforcement, of regulations
governing the conduct of individuals on
federal property to areas in or around
the fence replacement and border wall
prototype project areas, pursuant to 40
U.S.C. 1315(d)(2)(A). The project areas
for border wall prototype and fence
replacement are situated within a
geographic area that starts at the Pacific
Ocean and extends to approximately
one mile east of Border Monument 251.
Specifically, I temporarily extended the
applicability, allowing the enforcement,
of the regulations in 41 CFR part 102–
74, subpart C, to any property owned or
occupied by the Federal Government at
or near the fence replacement and
border wall prototype project areas near
the city of San Diego.
The regulations in 41 CFR part 102–
74, subpart C, will remain applicable
and enforceable at these locations for
the duration of the construction related
to the fence replacement and border
wall prototypes near the city of San
Diego.
Elaine C. Duke,
Acting Secretary of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2017–20383 Filed 9–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–10–P
FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
EXAMINATION COUNCIL
12 CFR Part 1102
[Docket No. AS17–07]
Collection and Transmission of Annual
AMC Registry Fees
Appraisal Subcommittee of the
Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council (ASC).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
2006, Public Law 109–367, section 3, 120 Stat. 2638
(Oct. 26, 2006) (8 U.S.C. 1103 note), as amended by
the Department of Homeland Security
Appropriations Act, 2008, Public Law 110–161,
Div. E, Title V, section 564, 121 Stat. 2090 (Dec. 26,
2007) (8 U.S.C. 1103 note), Section 2 of the Secure
Fence Act of 2006, Public Law 109–367, 120 Stat.
2638 (Oct. 26, 2006) (8 U.S.C. 1701 note), and E.O.
13767.
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
44494
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 184 / Monday, September 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
The ASC is adopting a final
rule to implement collection and
transmission of appraisal management
company (AMC) annual registry fees in
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank
Act) to be applied by State appraiser
certifying and licensing agencies that
elect to register and supervise AMCs,
pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 3353 and the
regulations promulgated thereunder.
DATES: Effective date. This final rule
will become effective on November 24,
2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James R. Park, Executive Director, at
(202) 595–7575, or Alice M. Ritter,
General Counsel, at (202) 595–7577,
Appraisal Subcommittee, 1401 H Street
NW., Suite 760, Washington, DC 20005.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Background
Section 1473 of the Dodd-Frank Act 1
included amendments to Title XI of the
Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery,
and Enforcement Act of 1989 2 (Title
XI). Section 1109 of Title XI,3 Roster of
State certified or licensed appraisers;
authority to collect and transmit fees,
was amended by the Dodd-Frank Act to
require States 4 that elect to register and
supervise AMCs to collect: (1) From
AMCs that have been in existence for
more than a year an annual registry fee
of $25 multiplied by the number of
appraisers working for or contracting
with such AMC in such State during the
previous year; and (2) from AMCs that
have not been in existence for more than
a year, $25 multiplied by an appropriate
number to be determined by the ASC.
Such $25 amount may be adjusted, up
to a maximum of $50, at the discretion
of the ASC, if necessary to carry out the
ASC’s Title XI functions.5
Section 1117 of Title
XI,6 Establishment of State appraiser
certifying and licensing agencies, was
amended by the Dodd-Frank Act to
include additional duties for States, if
they so choose, to: (1) Register and
supervise AMCs; and (2) add
information about AMCs in their State
to the National Registry of AMCs (AMC
Registry).7 States electing to register and
1 Public
Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376.
Law 101–73, 103 Stat. 183.
3 12 U.S.C. 3338.
4 As of January, 2017, the 50 States, the District
of Columbia, and four Territories, which are the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and United
States Virgin Islands, had State appraiser certifying
and licensing agencies.
5 See 12 U.S.C. 3338(a)(4)(B).
6 12 U.S.C. 3346.
7 Title XI as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act
defines ‘‘appraisal management company’’ to mean,
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
2 Public
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
supervise AMCs under Section 1117
must implement minimum
requirements in accordance with the
AMC Rule.8
Section 1103 of Title XI,9 Functions of
Appraisal Subcommittee, was amended
by the Dodd-Frank Act to require the
ASC to maintain the AMC Registry of
those AMCs that are either:
(1) Registered with and subject to
supervision by a State that has elected
to register and supervise AMCs; or (2)
are operating subsidiaries of a Federally
regulated financial institution (Federally
regulated AMCs). On or before the
effective date of this rule, the ASC will
issue an ASC Bulletin to States that will
address:
1. When the AMC Registry will be
open for States; and
2. Reporting requirements
(information required to be submitted
by States in order to register AMCs on
the AMC Registry) with the effective
date for compliance.
Title XI as amended by the DoddFrank Act imposes a statutory
restriction on performance of services
by AMCs for a federally related
transaction (FRT) 10 that applies after a
in part, an external third party that oversees a
network or panel of more than 15 appraisers, who
are State certified or licensed in a State, or 25 or
more appraisers nationally (two or more States)
within a given year. (See 12 U.S.C. 3350(11)). Title
XI as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act also allows
States to adopt requirements in addition to those in
the AMC Rule. (See 12 U.S.C. 3353(b)). For
example, States may decide to supervise entities
that provide appraisal management services, but do
not meet the size thresholds of the Title XI
definition of AMC. If a State has a more expansive
regulatory framework that covers entities that
provide appraisal management services but do not
meet the Title XI definition of AMC, the State
should only submit information regarding AMCs
meeting the Title XI definition to the AMC Registry.
8 The Dodd-Frank Act added section 1124 to Title
XI, Appraisal Management Company Minimum
Requirements, which required the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency (OCC); Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board);
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC);
National Credit Union Administration (NCUA);
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau);
and Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to
establish, by rule, minimum requirements for the
registration and supervision of AMCs by States that
elect to register and supervise AMCs pursuant to
Title XI and the rules promulgated thereunder. The
Agencies issued a final rule (AMC Rule) with an
effective date of August 10, 2015. (80 FR 32658,
June 9, 2015).
9 12 U.S.C. 3332.
10 A federally related transaction includes any
real estate-related financial transaction which: (a) A
Federal financial institutions regulatory agency
engages in, contracts for, or regulates; and (b)
requires the services of an appraiser. See Title XI
sec. 1121 (4), 12 U.S.C. 3350), implemented by the
OCC: 12 CFR 34.42(f) and 34.43(a); Board: 12 CFR
225.62(f) and 225.63(a); FDIC: 12 CFR 323.2(f) and
323.3(a); and NCUA: 12 CFR 722.2(f) and 722.3(a).
Based on 2014 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
(HMDA) data, at least 90 percent of residential
mortgage loan originations are not subject to the
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
36-month period that began when the
AMC Rule became effective
(Implementation Period).11 The ASC
recognizes that States electing to register
and supervise AMCs may need to
amend their rules and/or regulations, or
revise their operating procedures in
order to implement AMC registry fees.
Given the limited period of time
between publication of this final rule
and the expiration of the
Implementation Period, States may not
be able to implement the AMC registry
fees within the Implementation Period.
As discussed further below in the
subsection Collection and transmission
of annual AMC registry fees, only those
AMCs whose registry fees have been
transmitted to the ASC are eligible to be
on the AMC Registry. While the ASC
encourages States that elect to register
and supervise AMCs to begin collecting
fees from registered AMCs as soon as
possible in accordance with the
requirements of Section 1109 of Title XI
so that those AMCs may be entered on
the AMC Registry, the restriction on
performance of services for FRTs will
not impact an AMC so long as the AMC
is registered with a State that has
elected to register and supervise AMCs,
or is subject to oversight by a Federal
financial institutions regulatory agency.
On May 20, 2016, the ASC published
a proposed rule with a 60-day public
comment period on implementation of
the annual AMC registry fee that States
would collect and transmit to the ASC
if they elect to register and supervise
AMCs.12 This final rule sets the fee
formula that States would apply in
collecting annual AMC registry fees and
transmitting those fees to the ASC.
II. The Final Rule
The final rule: (1) Establishes the
annual AMC registry fee in section 1109
of Title XI for AMCs in those States
electing to register and supervise AMCs;
and (2) implements collection and
transmission of AMC registry fees as
required by section 1109. The final rule
sets forth the ASC’s interpretation of the
phrase ‘‘working for or contracting
with’’ for purposes of calculating the
annual AMC registry fee.
Title XI appraisal regulations. (FFIEC report to
Congress, Economic Growth and Regulatory
Paperwork Reduction Act, 82 FR 15900 (March 30,
2017).
11 See 12 U.S.C. 3353(f)(1). In summary,
beginning 36 months from the effective date of the
AMC Rule, an AMC, as defined by Title XI, may not
provide services for FRTs in a State unless the AMC
is registered with the State pursuant to a
registration and supervision program established
under Section 1117, or is subject to oversight by a
Federal financial institutions regulatory agency.
12 81 FR 31868 (May 20, 2016).
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 184 / Monday, September 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
For the reasons discussed in section
III of this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION,
the final rule adopts the rule
substantially as proposed. The final rule
contains technical, nonsubstantive
changes.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
III. The Final Rule and Public
Comments on the Proposed Rule
The following is a section-by-section
review of the proposed rule and a
discussion of the public comments
received by the ASC concerning the
proposal. The ASC received 104
comment letters in response to the
published proposal. These comment
letters were received from State
appraiser certifying and licensing
agencies, AMCs, appraiser and real
estate trade associations, professional
associations, appraisal firms and
appraisers.
A. Section 1102.401 Definitions
The ASC requested comment on all
aspects of the proposed rule. The
following is a discussion of the
definitions, related public comments
and issues relating to those definitions.
Definitions on which the ASC did not
receive comment are not discussed
below and are adopted without change
in the final rule.
The ASC is adopting the definitions
substantially as proposed, including
cross-references to the definitions
established in the AMC Rule. Several
commenters requested that the crossreferenced definitions be included in
the final rule rather than as proposed by
cross reference to definitions in the
AMC Rule. However, if the ASC were to
adopt the approach suggested by these
commenters, in the event those AMC
Rule definitions are amended by the
interagency process in the future,
definitions included in this rule would
become inaccurate and inconsistent. To
avoid that circumstance, the ASC is
adopting the definitions as proposed
with cross-reference to those definitions
established by the AMC Rule.
One commenter expressed concern
over the definition of ‘‘appraiser panel’’
stating AMCs should not be penalized
over other providers of appraisal
services, and included discussion on
appraisal firms and AMCs. This
commenter quoted language from the
AMC Rule on appraisal firms. Another
commenter expressed concern that the
definition of ‘‘appraiser panel’’ should
only include independent contractors
and not employees. The issues raised by
these commenters were determined in
the interagency AMC Rule during that
rulemaking process.
Proposed § 1102.401(d) defined
performance of an appraisal. Proposed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
§ 1102.401(d) is being corrected to
define performed an appraisal, which
conforms to the actual phrase used
throughout the rule, to mean the
appraisal service requested of an
appraiser by the AMC was provided to
the AMC. The ASC is adopting this
definition without substantive change as
§ 1102.401(d) in the final rule. One
commenter questioned whether this
referred to initial submission of the
report or when the appraisal has been
reviewed and accepted by the client in
its final form. The ASC recognizes that
the issue may be complicated by the
ongoing debate within the profession
concerning when an appraisal is
complete. The ASC is adopting the
definition as proposed, intending for the
terms to remain subject to a plain
English interpretation. Another
commenter requested a definition of
‘‘appraisal service’’ be included in the
final rule. The ASC recognizes that
various appraisal services could be
requested, including an appraisal
review, and therefore declines to define
the phrase, recognizing that States can
be more restrictive. In general,
commenters supported the proposed
definition.
Establishing the Annual AMC Registry
Fee
The ASC is adopting proposed
§ 1102.402 without change. Section
1102.402 establishes the annual AMC
registry fee for States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs as follows:
(1) In the case of an AMC that has
been in existence for more than a year,
$25 multiplied by the number of
appraisers who have performed an
appraisal for the AMC on a covered
transaction in such State during the
previous year; and (2) in the case of an
AMC that has not been in existence for
more than a year, $25 multiplied by the
number of appraisers who have
performed an appraisal for the AMC on
a covered transaction in such State since
the AMC commenced doing business.
For AMCs that have been in existence
for more than a year, section 1109 of
Title XI provides that the annual AMC
registry fee is based on the number of
appraisers ‘‘working for or contracting
with’’ an AMC in a State during a 12month period multiplied by $25, but
where such $25 amount may be
adjusted up to a maximum of $50.13 The
final rule adopts the minimum fee of
$25 as set by statute and interprets the
phrase ‘‘working for or contracting
with’’ to mean those appraisers on an
AMC appraiser panel that performed an
13 See Title XI sec. 1109(a)(4)(B), 12 U.S.C.
3338(a)(4)(B).
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44495
appraisal for the AMC on a covered
transaction during the previous year in
a particular State.
For AMCs that have not been in
existence for more than a year, the
statute requires a determination by the
ASC of an appropriate multiplier to
calculate registry fees for those AMCs.
The ASC proposed to use the same
factors of $25 multiplied by the number
of appraisers that performed an
appraisal for the AMC on a covered
transaction, but the fee would be based
on the actual period of time since the
AMC commenced doing business rather
than 12 months. For example, if an
AMC has been operating for 6 months,
the fee would be calculated by
multiplying $25 by the number of
appraisers that performed an appraisal
for the AMC on a covered transaction
during that 6-month period.
One commenter stated the ASC
should identify what it will do with
revenue from AMC registry fees and
suggested the ASC should consider
decreasing the fee to less than $25
which would still allow the ASC plenty
of funds to perform its Title XI-related
functions. The commenter asserted the
ASC has discretion to do so. However,
section 1109(a)(4), by its plain terms,
sets the minimum fee allowed under the
statutory framework at $25. The statute
did provide latitude for the ASC to
establish an appropriate number to
multiply by $25 for AMCs that have not
been in existence for more than a year.
Using the actual period of time since the
AMC commenced doing business will
maintain some consistency in the
calculation of AMC registry fees to
reduce administrative burden for the
States. Based on the ASC’s anticipated
costs of overseeing States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs, as well as
the ASC’s anticipated costs of
maintaining the AMC Registry, the ASC
believes the proposed annual AMC
registry fee would cover those costs
while supporting other Title XI
functions of the ASC as mandated by
Congress, and in particular, further
development of its grant programs,
particularly to support States as funds
are available.
The ASC considered three options
with respect to interpreting the phrase
‘‘working for or contracting with.’’
Under the first option, the phrase
‘‘working for or contracting with’’
would have been interpreted to include
every appraiser on an AMC appraiser
panel during the reporting period 14 in
14 In the case of AMCs that have been in existence
for more than a year, the reporting period would be
12 months. In the case of an AMC that has not been
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
Continued
25SER1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
44496
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 184 / Monday, September 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
a particular State. The multiplier in this
option would have included all
appraisers on an AMC’s appraiser panel
in a particular State, including
appraisers accepted by the AMC for
consideration for future appraisal
assignments. One commenter stated this
option would likely penalize AMCs for
adding appraisers to their roster for
future use, and would also be
burdensome for States. Another
commenter stated the interpretation
under the first option would be the
easiest for States. The ASC remains
concerned that this option would
impose the most burden to AMCs and
impose the highest registry fees.
Under the second option, the phrase
‘‘working for or contracting with’’
would have been interpreted to include
those appraisers engaged by the AMC to
perform an appraisal on a covered
transaction during the reporting period
in a particular State. Under this option,
those appraisers engaged by the AMC to
perform an appraisal, regardless of
whether the appraiser completed the
appraisal during the reporting period,
would be included in the calculation of
the AMC’s registry fees.
The ASC requested comment on the
second option’s interpretation of the
phrase ‘‘working for or contracting
with’’ and whether this would be an
easier interpretation for the States to
administer. (See Question 3 in the
proposal.) Several commenters
expressed concern over this option. One
commenter stated that AMCs could
reduce their panel sizes, thereby
creating slower turnaround times and
utilizing fewer appraisers. Another
commenter stated the interpretation
under the second option would not be
easier to implement and States would
have to rely on AMCs self reporting this
information. Another commenter
expressed concern that the second
option could penalize AMCs if an order
is accepted and assigned but later
cancelled and neither the AMC or the
appraiser receive any compensation,
and could also be burdensome for States
to enforce without having a status of
assignments and their completion
during a given timeframe.
Under the third option, which is
adopted in the final rule, the phrase
‘‘working for or contracting with’’
includes those appraisers that
performed an appraisal for the AMC on
a covered transaction during the
reporting period in a particular State.
This option excludes appraisers
accepted by the AMC for consideration
in existence for more than a year, the reporting
period would be since the AMC commenced doing
business.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
for future appraisal assignments as well
as appraisers who performed appraisals
in the past, but did not perform any
appraisals in the reporting period. The
AMC registry fee is not intended to
result in an appraiser being counted
twice in calculating the fee, regardless
of how many appraisals that appraiser
performed in a single State during a
reporting period. A few commenters
misunderstood the proposed application
of the fee and thought the fee would be
calculated based on the total number of
individual appraisers on an AMC panel,
or that the fee would be imposed based
on individual appraisals, neither of
which is consistent with the proposal or
the final rule.
Several commenters expressed
support for the third option as having
the least economic impact to an AMC,
the least burden for appraisers and
preferable from a State administrative
point of view. A few commenters
expressed support for the third option
but believed it would be a burden for
States to collect information from
AMCs. One commenter, while stating
the third option is costly to AMCs,
stated that the third option would be the
most equitable as it applies to those
appraisers who had completed appraisal
assignments, and that the first two
options may cause AMCs to pare their
appraiser panels. One commenter stated
the third option would also simplify the
queries that States would need to run to
report all registered AMCs that have
completed appraisal reports during a
specific year or timeframe. Another
commenter stated AMCs may use fewer
appraisers for appraisal assignments to
keep AMC registry fees down. The ASC
anticipates there may well be such
responses by AMCs to reduce their
registry fees, but under the statutory
framework, it is seemingly unavoidable.
The ASC requested comment on the
ASC’s interpretation of the phrase
‘‘working for or contracting with.’’ (See
Question 2 in the proposal.) One
commenter expressed concern that for
AMCs in business less than 12 months,
determining how many appraisals have
been performed could be difficult.
Another commenter suggested ‘‘working
for’’ and ‘‘contracting with’’ should be
properly defined with specifics and
parameters. One commenter requested
clarification of the term ‘‘working for,’’
and another commenter, while
supporting the third option, commented
the term ‘‘performed’’ needs clarity,
suggesting appraisals could be
considered ‘‘performed’’ when delivered
by the AMC to the client. The ASC
recognizes that because the AMC is
acting as an agent of the appraiser’s
client, delivery of an appraisal to the
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
AMC could also be deemed delivery to
the client. The ASC is adopting the
interpretation as proposed, intending for
the terms to remain subject to a plain
English interpretation.
The ASC also requested comment on
what aspects of the proposed rule, if
any, would be challenging for States to
implement and any alternative
approaches that would make
implementation easier, while
maintaining consistency with the
statute. (See Question 8 in the proposal.)
Several commenters expressed concern
that the proposed rule would create
significant administrative burden on the
State to calculate and verify registry
fees, and would also result in
expenditures to administer and transmit
the registry fees. Some commenters are
opposed to the fee in general, while a
few expressed opposition to AMCs. A
few commenters suggested no action
should be taken until the Dodd-Frank
Act is amended. One commenter stated
the ASC should seek legislative changes
to 12 U.S.C. 3338 asserting it is
fundamentally flawed, and requested
withdrawal of the proposed rule until
the federal statute is changed. The ASC,
however, is charged with
implementation of the statute as passed
by Congress.
One commenter stated that the 500
hours of regulatory burden is
understated, and added States should be
reimbursed for expenses in collecting
and transmitting registry fees. Another
commenter also stated that the 500
hours is underestimated stating the ASC
failed to consider administrative costs
and expenses for creating and
maintaining a database, and for the staff
time to run the program. The ASC is
working to minimize such burden in
simplifying the reporting requirements
for AMCs. As stated in the proposal, the
ASC will issue a Bulletin to address
reporting requirements with the
effective date for compliance.
Another commenter foresees several
barriers to collecting reliable data on
how many appraisers are on an AMC
panel and how many have done work
for the AMC in the previous 12 months,
including the necessity to adopt new
rules, create new forms and update
current IT systems to collect and
maintain this data, all of which will
result in increased labor costs for staff
needed for implementation of the
proposed rule. As stated in the proposed
rule, the ASC anticipates further
development of its grants program,
particularly in support of the States as
funds are available. The statutory
purpose of ASC grants to the States is
to provide funds to assist States in
compliance with Title XI. Therefore, as
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 184 / Monday, September 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
funds are available, the ASC could
consider establishing a grant to assist
States in registry reporting requirements
and transmission of registry fees for
both appraisers and AMCs. Another
commenter suggested the ASC should
provide a revenue projection as well as
costs to develop the AMC Registry. The
ASC has included those expenses in its
budget process and will continue to do
so on an annual basis.
Another commenter opposed the
interpretation of ‘‘working for or
contracting with,’’ stating it will create
an entirely new regulatory criterion for
States to implement and validate,
thereby requiring audits. It should be
noted that there is no federal
requirement for States to audit AMCs to
determine validity of information
submitted to the State. A State may
determine to periodically audit, or not
to exercise such authority at all, or
alternatively, a State may rely on the
complaint/investigation process to
determine if and when an audit is
warranted.
By far the majority of comments
received expressed concern over these
additional fees and the impact on
appraisers if the fee is passed on to them
by the AMCs. More specifically, these
commenters requested that the final rule
prohibit AMCs from passing the fee on
to appraisers. While the ASC shares in
the concern expressed over the fee being
passed on to appraisers, such regulation
of AMCs is outside of the authority of
the ASC. The ASC notes the fee
imposed by statute is not a fee assessed
on appraisers, but rather on AMCs.
Some commenters identified certain
States are already attempting to regulate
this at the State level. One commenter,
however, stated the choice to pass the
fee on to the appraiser should be left to
the AMC, and that appraisers have a
choice whether to participate on an
AMC panel.
Some commenters expressed concern
that AMCs hide their appraisal
management fees from borrowers by
including them as part of the fee paid
to appraisers, and requested that the
final rule require fees be disclosed to the
borrower. This, however, is outside the
authority of the ASC. Comments were
also received expressing concern over
AMCs not paying customary and
reasonable fees to appraisers, or
charging appraisers various fees to be on
an AMC panel. This too is outside the
authority of the ASC.
One commenter suggested
consideration of a de minimis
exception, stating the ASC should allow
AMCs to use the IRS 1099 threshold and
thus exclude those appraisers to whom
it pays less than $600 during a tax year,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
which would include appraisers who
performed only one appraisal
assignment, and perhaps up to three.
The commenter suggests its proposal as
an alternative to potentially reduce
AMC registry fees. However, the ASC
would not have authority under the
statute to provide such an exception,
particularly in the case of AMCs that
have been in existence for more than a
year. Furthermore, the ASC is
concerned there would be undesirable
consequences. For example, there could
be a reduction in appraiser fees in order
to avoid the proposed threshold.
Additionally, AMCs might select
appraisers in a manner to avoid the
threshold rather than basing a selection
on competency. The ASC will continue
to work with States to address increased
burden and will continue to explore
means to provide additional grant
funding to the States to support State
programs as funds are available and
additional grant policies and procedures
are developed and approved.
A few commenters expressed
preference for a flat fee to avoid any
need to verify that AMCs are sending in
the correct amount, another commenter
suggested a two-tiered system and
another commenter suggested a tiered
structure based on the size of the
appraiser panel and/or the volume of
appraisals brokered by an AMC. The
ASC considered these various options to
calculating the AMC registry fee, but
concluded that such options were not
supported by the statute. Also, the ASC
notes, in response to several
commenters expressing concern over
the honor system versus auditing AMCs
on information provided to the State by
AMCs, that it is up to the State to
determine whatever process the State
deems appropriate.
Two commenters stated the AMC
registry fee should be calculated based
on FRTs, not covered transactions. The
ASC believes the proposal is consistent
with the AMC Rule and the statute. The
AMC Rule defined a covered transaction
as any consumer credit transaction
secured by the consumer’s principal
dwelling.15 As stated in the AMC Rule
preamble, the definition did not limit
the definition of covered transaction to
FRTs, even though Title XI and its
implementing regulations have applied
historically only to appraisals for FRTs.
The AMC Rule, through the interagency
process, determined that defining
‘‘covered transaction’’ as such reflected
the statutory text of section 1121(11),
which defines the term ‘‘appraisal
management company,’’ as in pertinent
part, ‘‘any external third party
authorized either by a creditor of a
consumer credit transaction secured by
the consumer’s principal dwelling or by
an underwriter of or other principal in
the secondary mortgage markets.’’ 16 It
was further stated in the AMC Rule
preamble that applying coverage of the
AMC Rule beyond FRTs was consistent
with the structure and text of other parts
of Title XI, section 1124, most of which
address appraisals generally rather than
appraisals only for FRTs, and in
particular, the text of section 1124(a)(4)
of Title XI indicates that one of the chief
purposes of the minimum requirements
for AMCs is to ensure compliance with
the valuation independence standards
established pursuant to section 129E of
the Truth and Lending Act (TILA) (15
U.S.C. 1639e).17 The preamble of the
AMC Rule concluded that those
standards apply to AMCs whenever they
engage in a consumer credit transaction
secured by the consumer’s principal
dwelling, regardless of whether the
transaction is a FRT.18
Another commenter questioned the
benefit of the AMC Registry to the
industry as a whole. The ASC notes the
requirement for the ASC to maintain the
AMC Registry is statutory. The benefit
of the Registry initially will be to
promote information sharing between
States on AMCs. The Registry will also
allow lenders, AMCs and other
stakeholders to identify AMCs that are
located in participating States, and
therefore subject to State registration
and supervision. In addition, the
Registry will identify AMCs that are
Federally regulated AMCs.
Collection and Transmission of Annual
AMC Registry Fees
The ASC is adopting § 1102.403(a)
and (b) substantially as proposed
regarding collection and transmission of
annual AMC registry fees. On or before
the effective date of this rule, the ASC
will issue an ASC Bulletin to States that
will address:
1. When the AMC Registry will be
open for States; and
2. Reporting requirements
(information required to be submitted
by States in order to register AMCs on
the AMC Registry) with the effective
date for compliance.
Section 1102.403(a) and (b)
implement collection and transmission
of annual AMC registry fees for States
that elect to register and supervise
AMCs following the statutory scheme
16 See
80 FR 32658, 32664 (June 9, 2015).
Title XI sec. 1124(a)(4), 12 U.S.C.
3353(a)(4).
18 See 80 FR 32658, 32664 (June 9, 2015).
17 See
15 See 12 CFR 34.211(h); 12 CFR 225.191(h); 12
CFR 323.9(h); 12 CFR 1222.21(h) (2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44497
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
44498
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 184 / Monday, September 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
set forth in sections 1109 and 1117 of
Title XI as amended by the Dodd-Frank
Act. The final rule requires AMC
registry fees to be collected and
transmitted to the ASC on an annual
basis by States that elect to register and
supervise AMCs. Only those AMCs
whose registry fees have been
transmitted to the ASC are eligible to be
on the AMC Registry.
The ASC requested comment on all
aspects of proposed collection and
transmission of annual AMC registry
fees. (See Question 4 in the proposal.)
One commenter stated that while it is
understandable that States should have
some flexibility in connection with the
collection of registry fees, some
boundaries or guidelines should be
implemented within the final rule
because varying State expiration dates
could be financially and logistically
challenging for AMCs. One commenter
stated that the staggered renewal dates
could complicate the reporting process
and may be a burden to AMCs and
States to maintain records. The
commenter suggested the reporting
period should be the same for every
State. As proposed, the ASC recognizes
that States should have the flexibility to
align a one-year period with any 12month period, which may or may not be
based on the calendar year. Based on
annual fees paid by the States
historically for appraiser registry fees,
the ASC recognizes States require
flexibility to determine the period for
reporting and collection of registry fees
dependent on their budget cycles, rules
and statutes. States vary greatly on the
12-month cycle as well as renewal
cycles, which in some States may be 2
years or more. Just as many States do
not use a calendar year for their existing
appraiser credentialing process, the ASC
believes that allowing States to set the
12-month period provides appropriate
flexibility and will help States comply
with the collection and transmission of
AMC fees and reduce regulatory burden
for State governments. States may
choose to do this in a similar manner as
they currently do for their appraisers,
meaning some States have a date certain
every year, while other States use, for
example, the appraiser’s date of birth
(States could use AMC registration date
similarly). The registration cycle is left
to the individual States to determine,
but the ASC notes that the statutory
requirement in section 1109(a)(4)
requires States to submit AMC registry
fees to the ASC annually.19
Several other commenters expressed
concern over the additional burden on
19 See
Title XI sec. 1109(a)(4)(B), 12 U.S.C.
3338(a)(4)(B).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
States to collect and transmit
information and fees to the ASC and the
need for additional funding and staff.
Another commenter stated the ASC
should consider implementing a
centralized computer system for
collecting AMC registry fees, and use
some of the fees to provide grants to
States to set up and run their AMC
programs. The ASC will continue to
work with States to address increased
burden and will continue to explore
means to provide additional grant
funding to the States to support State
programs as funds are available and
additional grant policies and procedures
are developed and approved.
One commenter objected to States
levying additional fees on AMCs to
cover the costs of collecting and
transmitting fees to the ASC. This
commenter referenced the AMC Rule
stating in its preamble the option for
States to collect administrative fees from
Federally regulated AMCs to offset the
cost of collecting the AMC Registry fee
and the information related to the fee.
The ASC understands the basis for the
concern, but recognizes this is a matter
left to the States.
The ASC requested comment on
Federally regulated AMCs operating in
a State that does not elect to register and
supervise AMCs, and whether the ASC
should collect information and fees
directly from those Federally regulated
AMCs. (See Question 5 in the proposal.)
The ASC received a number of
comments in response to this question.
One commenter expressed concerns
about collecting fees from Federally
regulated AMCs which are exempt from
registration with the State. Another
commenter stated that Federally
regulated AMCs operating in a State that
does not have an AMC program should
report and submit fees directly to the
ASC. A few commenters stated that the
State would not have authority to
collect fees from entities that are exempt
from State licensure and they do not
have authority to require that those
entities submit data to the State Board
and requested that the ASC collect the
fees from those entities directly. Several
commenters stated the ASC should
collect fees directly from Federally
regulated AMCs rather than the State
acting as a pass-through. One
commenter stated if the ASC sets up a
program to collect fees from Federally
regulated AMCs in States that do not
register and supervise AMCs, the ASC
should consider the same for States with
an AMC program. Another commenter
stated that States could choose to opt
out due to the reported low percentage
of FRTs compared to overall
transactions, which would result in a
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
barrier to collection of fees in those
States. The ASC considered
commenters’ concerns, but recognizes
the authority to impose requirements on
Federally regulated AMCs lies with the
Agencies.20 The ASC will work with the
Agencies to address these concerns.
Some commenters expressed concern
that even though they elect to register
and supervise AMCs, they would have
no authority over Federally regulated
AMCs, and therefore no ability to accept
information or fees from those AMCs.
The ASC recognizes this may present a
challenge for some States. However, for
States that elect to register and
supervise AMCs, the requirement to
collect fees from Federally regulated
AMCs is statutory. The Agencies 21
involved with issuing the AMC Rule
recognized that practical challenges may
arise as the minimum requirements are
adopted in States and reporting
requirements take effect and the
Agencies committed to monitor these
issues. The ASC will monitor these
issues as well and will continue to
explore means to provide additional
grant funding to the States to support
State programs as funds are available
and additional grant policies and
procedures are developed and
approved.
The ASC requested comment on what
barriers, if any, exist that would make
it difficult for a State to implement the
collection and transmission of AMC
registry fees (see Question 6 in the
proposal) and what costs, both direct in
terms of fees and indirect in terms of
administrative costs, would be
associated with collection and
transmission of AMC registry fees (see
Question 7 in the proposal). One
commenter estimated that the burden
for a State’s program would be 25 hours
per month of staff time to complete and
would cost approximately $6000 to
design a database and $700/month for
staff to maintain. Another commenter
stated the proposed rule could
negatively affect AMCs, consumers and
real estate appraisers, as well as create
burden for States. This commenter also
stated AMCs will likely pass on fees to
clients and therefore consumers.
Another commenter stated costs may
negatively affect smaller AMCs causing
consolidation of AMCs. Another
concern was that AMCs may pare down
appraiser panels. The ASC recognizes
the collection and transmission to the
ASC of AMC registry fees by the States
would create some recordkeeping,
reporting and compliance requirements.
20 OCC, Board, FDIC, NCUA, Bureau, and FHFA
(see footnote 8).
21 Id.
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 184 / Monday, September 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
However, these collection and
transmission requirements are imposed
by the statute. The ASC will continue to
work with States to address increased
burden and will continue to explore
means to provide additional grant
funding to the States to support State
programs as funds are available and
additional grant policies and procedures
are developed and approved.
Several commenters requested that
States should be allowed to send in
multi-year registry fees rather than
annually. Another commenter expressed
concern that States could incur
significant administrative costs to
implement programming changes to
their computer systems if they have to
collect fees annually rather than multiyear fees as they do now for appraisers.
If a State can assess on a multi-year
basis, the ASC would not object.
However, the ASC notes that the
statutory requirement in section
1109(a)(4) requires States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs to submit
AMC registry fees to the ASC
annually.22 For clarification purposes,
language that was included at the end
of proposed section 1102.403(b)
referencing the ‘‘12-month period
subsequent to payment of the fee’’ has
been removed to avoid conflict should
a State assess the fee on a multi-year
basis.
Another commenter expressed the
desire for the ASC to continue to accept
data files for AMCs. Historically, the
ASC accepted data files, and continues
to do so on a limited basis for the
Appraiser Registry. However, this
method of transmitting rosters is
obsolete and time consuming. The ASC
has continued to improve the Appraiser
Registry using more up-to-date
transmission methods such as the
extranet application and Simple Object
Access Protocol (SOAP) in order to
provide more real-time information on
the National Registries. While the ASC
recognizes this may impose additional
burden on States, the ASC will continue
to explore means to provide grant
funding to the States to support State
programs as funds are available and
additional grant policies and procedures
are developed and approved.
Another commenter was concerned
with specific collection and
transmission scenarios and how various
scenarios would impact determination
of fees, calculation of panel size,
transmission of fees, verification of fee
calculation and audit requirements.
Several of this commenter’s concerns
deal with logistics and will be part of
22 See Title XI sec. 1109(a)(4)(B), 12 U.S.C.
3338(a)(4)(B).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
the ASC Bulletin concerning reporting
requirements which will be issued after
this final rule. This commenter also
wanted to know what timeline the ASC
is considering between verification and
remittance, similar to another
commenter who stated there should be
flexibility with the timing of payment of
fees and the actual transmission of the
fees, and that the final rule should add
additional language that clearly
addresses these potential gaps in order
to avoid any unintended consequences.
This is a matter that will be left to the
States to administer within the
following parameters: (1) AMC registry
fees must be collected and transmitted
to the ASC on an annual basis by States
that elect to register and supervise
AMCs; and (2) only those AMCs whose
registry fees have been transmitted to
the ASC are eligible to be on the AMC
Registry.
IV. Regulatory Analysis
Paperwork Reduction Act
Certain provisions of the final rule
contain ‘‘information collection’’
requirements within the meaning of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Under the PRA,
the ASC may not conduct or sponsor,
and, notwithstanding any other
provision of law, a person is not
required to respond to, an information
collection unless the information
collection displays a valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number. The information collection
requirements contained in this final rule
were submitted to OMB for review and
approval at the proposed rule stage by
the ASC pursuant to section 3506 of the
PRA and section 1320.11 of the OMB’s
implementing regulations (5 CFR part
1320). OMB instructed the ASC to
examine public comment in response to
the proposed rule and describe in the
supporting statement of their next
collections any public comments
received regarding the collection as well
as why (or why it did not) incorporate
the commenter’s recommendation. The
ASC received 12 public comments
regarding the collection and concern of
burden on States, and two comments
voiced concern that the ASC did not
perform a cost benefit analysis. The ASC
described the comments in the
supporting statement above and the
discussion below on the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, and addressed why the
ASC did not incorporate commenters’
recommendations. The collection of
information requirements in the final
rule are found in §§ 1102.400–1102.403.
This information is required to
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44499
implement section 1473 of the DoddFrank Act.
Title of Information Collection:
Collection and Transmission of Annual
AMC Registry Fees.
OMB Control Nos.: The ASC will be
seeking new control numbers for these
collections.
Frequency of Response: Event
generated.
Affected Public: States; businesses or
other for-profit and not-for-profit
organizations.
Abstract
State Recordkeeping Requirements
States that elect to register and
supervise AMCs are required to collect
and transmit annual AMC registry fees
to the ASC. Section 1102.402 establishes
the annual AMC registry fee for States
that elect to register and supervise
AMCs as follows: (1) In the case of an
AMC that has been in existence for more
than a year, $25 multiplied by the
number of appraisers who have
performed an appraisal for the AMC on
a covered transaction in such State
during the previous year; and (2) in the
case of an AMC that has not been in
existence for more than a year, $25
multiplied by the number of appraisers
who have performed an appraisal for the
AMC on a covered transaction in such
State since the AMC commenced doing
business.
Section 1102.403 requires AMC
registry fees to be collected and
transmitted to the ASC on an annual
basis by States that elect to register and
supervise AMCs. Only those AMCs
whose registry fees have been
transmitted to the ASC will be eligible
to be on the AMC Registry. Section
1102.403 clarifies that States may align
a one-year period with any 12-month
period, which may, or may not, be based
on the calendar year. The registration
cycle is left to the individual States to
determine.
State Reporting Burden
Section 1103 of Title XI, Functions of
Appraisal Subcommittee, was amended
by the Dodd-Frank Act to require the
ASC to maintain a registry of AMCs that
are either: (1) Registered with and
subject to supervision by a State; or (2)
Federally regulated AMCs. On or before
the effective date of this rule, the ASC
will issue an ASC Bulletin to States that
will address:
1. When the AMC Registry will be
open for States; and
2. Reporting requirements
(information required to be submitted
by States in order to register AMCs on
the AMC Registry) with the effective
date for compliance.
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
44500
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 184 / Monday, September 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Burden Estimates:
Total Number of Respondents: 500
AMCs, 55 States.
Burden Total: 500 hours.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., generally requires
that, in connection with a rulemaking,
an agency prepare and make available
for public comment a regulatory
flexibility analysis that describes the
impact of the proposed rule on small
entities. However, the regulatory
flexibility analysis otherwise required
under the RFA is not required if an
agency certifies that the proposed rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities and publishes its certification
and a brief explanatory statement in the
Federal Register together with the rule.
Based on its analysis, and for the
reasons stated below, the ASC believes
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Section 1109 of Title XI provides that
State appraiser certifying and licensing
agencies that elect to register and
supervise AMCs shall collect (1) from
AMCs that have been in existence for
more than a year, annual AMC registry
fees in the amount of $25 (up to a
maximum of $50) multiplied by the
number of appraisers ‘‘working for or
contracting with’’ an AMC in a State
during the previous year; and (2) from
AMCs that have not been in existence
for more than a year, annual AMC
registry fees in the amount of $25 (up to
a maximum of $50) multiplied by an
appropriate number to be determined by
the ASC.23 The purpose of the statutory
fee is to support the ASC’s functions
under Title XI. Because the ASC
believes the minimum fee required by
the statute would be adequate to
support its functions, the rule adopts
the minimum fee of $25 as set by
statute. The rule also interprets the
phrase ‘‘working for or contracting
with’’ to mean those appraisers that
performed an appraisal for the AMC on
a covered transaction during the
reporting period. For AMCs that have
existed for more than a year, the formula
is $25 multiplied by the number of
appraisers who have performed an
appraisal for the AMC on a covered
transaction during the previous year.
For AMCs that have not existed for more
than a year, the $25 fee is multiplied by
the number of appraisers that performed
an appraisal for the AMC on a covered
23 See
12 U.S.C. 3338(a)(4)(B).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
transaction since the AMC commenced
doing business.
Regarding the fee for AMCs that have
been in existence for more than a year,
the ASC believes the rule imposes the
minimum fee allowed under the
statutory provisions of section 1109.
The ASC did not exercise statutory
discretion granted to the ASC to
increase the fee above $25. Further, the
ASC interprets ‘‘working for or
contracting with’’ to mean only those
appraisers who actually performed an
appraisal for the AMC, as opposed to all
appraisers on the AMC’s panel or all
appraisers engaged, regardless of
whether the assignment was completed.
The ASC believes this formula results in
the lowest fee allowed by the statute
and the ASC chose not to exercise its
authority to increase this minimum fee.
Therefore, any burden produced is the
result of statutory and not regulatory
requirements.
The ASC has also decided to adopt
the statutory minimum fee of $25 for
AMCs that have not existed for more
than a year. As required by statute, the
ASC adopted an appropriate number
against which to multiply the $25 fee.
The ASC adopted the same multiple as
used for AMCs that have existed for
more than a year (i.e., the number of
appraisers that have performed
appraisal assignments for the AMC). It
is possible that the ASC may have been
able to adopt a multiple that would have
resulted in a lower fee and would still
be deemed appropriate. In this regard,
the rule may have created a burden for
AMCs that have not existed for more
than a year, beyond the burden created
by the statutory requirements alone.
However, using the actual period of
time since the AMC commenced doing
business will maintain some
consistency in the calculation of AMC
registry fees to reduce administrative
burden for the States.
One commenter stated the proposed
rule would have a large financial impact
on smaller AMCs and community banks
and credit unions, as well as appraisers,
and asserted that the RFA requires
analysis when the rule directly regulates
small entities. This commenter stated
that as an owner of a small AMC,
regulatory fees proposed are
burdensome, and as a national AMC, is
opposed to paying for the same
appraiser in different States, especially
given that the AMC registry fee is on top
of other State fees required by the
States, and regulatory oversight seems
‘‘duplicitous.’’ Another commenter
stated the proposed rule would affect
thousands of small appraisal businesses
as a result of AMCs passing the registry
fee on to appraisers, and that the ASC
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
should do extensive analysis on how the
proposed rule will affect residential
appraisers. The ASC shares in the
concern but has no authority to regulate
that issue. A few commenters indicated
that some States are looking at
regulating this issue at the State level.
In support of those States, the ASC
notes the fee imposed by statute is not
a fee assessed on appraisers, but rather
on AMCs. This commenter, similar to
the previous commenter, also did not
believe the requirements of section
609(a) of the RFA have been met and
that the fee may force small AMCs out
of business, as well as impact sole
proprietorships that accept assignments
from AMCs. This commenter went on to
state that while the ASC is not required
to adhere to Executive Order 12866 or
issue cost benefit analysis, this
commenter believes it is sound best
practice.
The ASC carefully considered these
matters and concluded requirements
under the rule are imposed by the
statute, not the rule, and further, the
requirements apply to those States that
elect to register and supervise AMCs
following the statutory scheme set forth
in section 1473 of the Dodd-Frank Act.
In addition, the RFA does not require an
agency to conduct a small-entity impact
analysis when the agency does not
regulate the affected entities (AMCs,
lenders, appraisers). The ASC’s
statutory oversight extends to State
certifying and licensing agencies.
Section 1109 of Title XI provides the
framework and minimum fee to collect
from AMCs for States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs. The ASC
believes the rule as proposed imposes
the minimum fee of $25 allowed under
the statutory provisions of section 1109.
The statute did provide latitude for the
ASC to establish an appropriate number
to multiply by $25 for AMCs that have
not been in existence for a year. Using
the actual period of time since the AMC
commenced doing business will
maintain some consistency in the
calculation of AMC registry fees to
reduce administrative burden for the
States. The ASC did not exercise
statutory discretion granted to the ASC
to increase the fee above $25. Therefore,
any burden produced is the result of
statutory and not regulatory
requirements.
While some burden beyond the
statutory requirements may have
resulted from the rule for AMCs that
have not existed for more than a year,
the ASC does not believe the rule will
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
There are only approximately 500 AMCs
operating in the United States. The
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 184 / Monday, September 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
annual regulatory burden will only
apply to new AMCs that have not
existed for more than a year. Given the
small number of AMCs currently in
operation, it is unlikely that there will
be a substantial number of AMCs that
commence doing business in any given
year. Further, the ASC adopted the
lowest possible fee of $25. Therefore,
the ASC does not believe that the
exercise of its discretion in setting the
fee formula for such AMCs will have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The collection and transmission to the
ASC of AMC registry fees by the States
would create some recordkeeping,
reporting and compliance requirements.
However, these collection and
transmission requirements are imposed
by the statute, not the rule. Further, the
RFA requires an agency to perform a
regulatory flexibility analysis of small
entity impacts when the agency’s rule
directly regulates the small entities.24
Based on its analysis, and for the
reasons stated above, the ASC believes
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Therefore, the
ASC certifies that the final rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Determination
The ASC has analyzed the final rule
under the factors in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(2 U.S.C. 1532). Under this analysis, the
ASC considered whether the final rule
includes a Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million
or more in any one year (adjusted
annually for inflation). For the following
reasons, the ASC finds that the final rule
does not trigger the $100 million UMRA
threshold. The costs specifically related
to requirements set forth in statute are
excluded from expenditures under the
24 For purposes of assessing the impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities, ‘‘small entities’’ is
defined in the RFA to include small businesses,
small not-for-profit organizations, and small
government jurisdictions. See 5 U.S.C. 601(6). A
‘‘small business’’ is determined by application of
SBA regulations and reference to the North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
classifications and size standards. See 5 U.S.C.
601(3). A ‘‘small organization’’ is any ‘‘not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and
operated and is not dominant in its field.’’ 5 U.S.C.
601(4). A ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction’’ is the
government of a city, county, town, township,
village, school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000. See 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
Given these definitions, States that elect to establish
licensing and certification authorities are not small
entities and the burden on them is not relevant to
this analysis.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
UMRA. Given that the final rule reflects
requirements that arise from section
1473 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the UMRA
cost estimate for the proposed rule is
zero. For this reason, and for the other
reasons cited above, the ASC has
determined that this final rule will not
result in expenditures by State, local,
and tribal governments, or the private
sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Accordingly, this proposed
rule is not subject to section 202 of the
UMRA.
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1102
Administrative practice and
procedure, Appraisers, Banks, Banking,
Freedom of information, Mortgages,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority and Issuance
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the ASC amends 12 CFR part
1102 as follows:
PART 1102—APPRAISER
REGULATION
1. The authority citation for part 1102
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 3348(a), 3332, 3335,
3338 (a)(4)(B), 3348(c), 5 U.S.C. 552a, 553(e);
Executive Order 12600, 52 FR 23781 (3 CFR,
1987 Comp., p. 235).
2. Subpart E to part 1102 is added to
read as follows:
■
Subpart E—Collection and Transmission of
Appraisal Management Company (AMC)
Registry Fees
Sec.
1102.400 Authority, purpose, and scope.
1102.401 Definitions.
1102.402 Establishing the annual AMC
registry fee.
1102.403 Collection and transmission of
annual AMC registry fees.
Subpart E—Collection and
Transmission of Appraisal
Management Company (AMC) Registry
Fees
§ 1102.400
Authority, purpose, and scope.
(a) Authority. This subpart is issued
by the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC)
under sections 1106 and 1109 (a)(4)(B)
of Title XI of the Financial Institutions
Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act
of 1989 (Title XI), as amended by the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank
Act) (Pub. L. 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376
(2010)), 12 U.S.C. 3335, 3338 (a)(4)(B)).
(b) Purpose. The purpose of this
subpart is to implement section 1109
(a)(4)(B) of Title XI, 12 U.S.C. 3338.
(c) Scope. This subpart applies to
States that elect to register and
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44501
supervise appraisal management
companies pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 3346
and 3353, and the regulations
promulgated thereunder.
§ 1102.401
Definitions.
For purposes of this subpart:
(a) AMC Registry means the national
registry maintained by the ASC of those
AMCs that meet the Federal definition
of AMC, as defined in 12 U.S.C.
3350(11), are registered by a State or are
Federally regulated, and have paid the
annual AMC registry fee.
(b) AMC Rule means the interagency
final rule on minimum requirements for
AMCs. (12 CFR 34.210–34.216; 12 CFR
225.190–225.196; 12 CFR 323.8–323.14;
12 CFR 1222.20–1222.26).
(c) ASC means the Appraisal
Subcommittee of the Federal Financial
Institutions Examination Council
established under section 1102 (12
U.S.C. 3310) as it amended the Federal
Financial Institutions Examination
Council Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3301 et
seq.) by adding section 1011.
(d) Performed an appraisal means the
appraisal service requested of an
appraiser by the AMC was provided to
the AMC.
(e) State means any State, the District
of Columbia, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, the
United States Virgin Islands, and
American Samoa.
(f) Other terms. Definitions of:
Appraisal management company
(AMC); appraisal management services;
appraisal panel; consumer credit;
covered transaction; dwelling; Federally
regulated AMC are incorporated from
the AMC Rule by reference.
§ 1102.402 Establishing the annual AMC
registry fee.
The annual AMC registry fee to be
applied by States that elect to register
and supervise AMCs is established as
follows:
(a) In the case of an AMC that has
been in existence for more than a year,
$25 multiplied by the number of
appraisers who have performed an
appraisal for the AMC in connection
with a covered transaction in such State
during the previous year; and
(b) In the case of an AMC that has not
been in existence for more than a year,
$25 multiplied by the number of
appraisers who have performed an
appraisal for the AMC in connection
with a covered transaction in such State
since the AMC commenced doing
business.
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
44502
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 184 / Monday, September 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
§ 1102.403 Collection and transmission of
annual AMC registry fees.
(a) Collection of annual AMC registry
fees. States that elect to register and
supervise AMCs pursuant to the AMC
Rule shall collect an annual registry fee
as established in § 1102.402 from AMCs
eligible to be on the AMC Registry.
(b) Transmission of annual AMC
registry fee. States that elect to register
and supervise AMCs pursuant to the
AMC Rule shall transmit AMC registry
fees as established in § 1102.402 to the
ASC on an annual basis. States may
align a one-year period with any 12month period, which may, or may not,
be based on the calendar year. Only
those AMCs whose registry fees have
been transmitted to the ASC will be
eligible to be on the AMC Registry.
By the Appraisal Subcommittee.
Dated: September 13, 2017.
Arthur Lindo,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. 2017–20400 Filed 9–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6700–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2017–0639; Product
Identifier 2017–CE–016–AD; Amendment
39–19052; AD 2017–19–22]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; British
Aerospace Regional Aircraft Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are superseding
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014–07–
09 for British Aerospace Regional
Aircraft Jetstream Series 3101 and
Jetstream Model 3201 airplanes. This
AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as both the need for newly
added inspections for corrosion, which
includes the door hinges/supporting
structure and attachment bolts for the
main spar joint and engine support, and
inadequate existing instructions for
inspection for corrosion for several areas
including the rudder hinge location on
the vertical stabilizer. We are issuing
this AD to require actions to address the
unsafe condition on these products.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
This AD is effective October 30,
2017.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in the AD
as of October 30, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2017–
0395; or in person at 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 service information identified in
this AD, contact BAE Systems
(Operations) Limited, Customer
Information Department, Prestwick
International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9
2RW, Scotland, United Kingdom;
telephone: +44 1292 675207; fax: +44
1292 675704; email: RApublications@
baesystems.com; Internet: https://
www.baesystems.com/Businesses/
RegionalAircraft/. You may view this
referenced service information at the
FAA, Policy and Innovation Division,
901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri
64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA,
call (816) 329–4148. It is also available
on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
Docket No. FAA–2017–0639.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Standards Branch,
901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–
4059; fax: (816) 329–4090; email:
doug.rudolph@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Discussion
We issued AD 2014–07–09,
Amendment 39–17823 (79 FR 22367;
April 22, 2014) (‘‘AD 2014–07–09’’).
That AD required actions intended to
address an unsafe condition on British
Aerospace Regional Aircraft Model
Jetstream Series 3101 and Jetstream
Model 3201 airplanes and was based on
mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an
aviation authority of another country.
Since we issued AD 2014–07–09,
more extensive reports of corrosion have
been received, resulting in the need to
inspect additional areas.
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) (82 FR 28592; June
23, 2017) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by
adding an AD that would apply to
British Aerospace Regional Aircraft
Model Jetstream Series 3101 and
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Jetstream Model 3201 airplanes and
supersede AD 2014–07–09.
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Community, has issued EASA AD No.:
2017–0073, dated April 27, 2017
(referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to
correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:
Maintenance instructions for BAE
Jetstream 3100 and 3200 aeroplanes, which
are approved by EASA, are currently defined
and published in the BAE Systems
(Operations) Ltd Jetstream Series 3100 &
3200 Corrosion Prevention and Control
Programme (CPCP) document, JS/CPCP/01.
These instructions have been identified as
mandatory for continued airworthiness.
Failure to accomplish these instructions
could result in an unsafe condition.
EASA issued AD 2012–0036 to require
operators to comply with the inspection
instructions as contained in the CPCP at
Revision 6.
Since that AD was issued, reports have
been received of finding extensive corrosion.
While affected areas are covered by an
existing zonal inspection, it has been
determined that this inspection is inadequate
to identify the corrosion in those areas.
Consequently, new inspection items 52–11–
002 C1, 200/EX/01 C2, 500/IN/02 C1, 600/IN/
04 C1 and 700/IN/04 C1 have been added to
the CPCP at Revision 8.
For the reason described above, this
[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA
AD 2012–0036, which is superseded, and
requires accomplishment of the actions
specified in BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd
Jetstream Series 3100 & 3200 CPCP, JS/CPCP/
01, Revision 8 (hereafter referred to as ‘the
CPCP’ in this AD).
The MCAI can be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at: https://
www.regulations.gov/
document?D=FAA-2017-0639-0002.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. The
following presents the comment
received on the NPRM and the FAA’s
response to the comment.
Summary Clarification
Kenneth MacKinnon of BAE Systems
Regional Aircraft stated that the
Summary and Reason, paragraph (e) of
this AD, both list corrosion issues that
were introduced at Revision 6, which he
assumes was mandated by AD 2014–07–
09. He assumes this is an error and that
both sections should summarize the
changes introduced at Revisions 7 and
8, as detailed in the BAE SYSTEMS
Certification Plans AWR/768/J3I and
AWR/815/J31 respectively. BAE wants
the summary to better reflect the
changes since FAA AD 2014–07–09.
We partially agree with this comment.
The Summary and Reason, paragraph (e)
E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM
25SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 184 (Monday, September 25, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44493-44502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20400]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL
12 CFR Part 1102
[Docket No. AS17-07]
Collection and Transmission of Annual AMC Registry Fees
AGENCY: Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council (ASC).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 44494]]
SUMMARY: The ASC is adopting a final rule to implement collection and
transmission of appraisal management company (AMC) annual registry fees
in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-
Frank Act) to be applied by State appraiser certifying and licensing
agencies that elect to register and supervise AMCs, pursuant to 12
U.S.C. 3353 and the regulations promulgated thereunder.
DATES: Effective date. This final rule will become effective on
November 24, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James R. Park, Executive Director, at
(202) 595-7575, or Alice M. Ritter, General Counsel, at (202) 595-7577,
Appraisal Subcommittee, 1401 H Street NW., Suite 760, Washington, DC
20005.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 1473 of the Dodd-Frank Act \1\ included amendments to Title
XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act
of 1989 \2\ (Title XI). Section 1109 of Title XI,\3\ Roster of State
certified or licensed appraisers; authority to collect and transmit
fees, was amended by the Dodd-Frank Act to require States \4\ that
elect to register and supervise AMCs to collect: (1) From AMCs that
have been in existence for more than a year an annual registry fee of
$25 multiplied by the number of appraisers working for or contracting
with such AMC in such State during the previous year; and (2) from AMCs
that have not been in existence for more than a year, $25 multiplied by
an appropriate number to be determined by the ASC. Such $25 amount may
be adjusted, up to a maximum of $50, at the discretion of the ASC, if
necessary to carry out the ASC's Title XI functions.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376.
\2\ Public Law 101-73, 103 Stat. 183.
\3\ 12 U.S.C. 3338.
\4\ As of January, 2017, the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, and four Territories, which are the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and United
States Virgin Islands, had State appraiser certifying and licensing
agencies.
\5\ See 12 U.S.C. 3338(a)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1117 of Title XI,\6\ Establishment of State appraiser
certifying and licensing agencies, was amended by the Dodd-Frank Act to
include additional duties for States, if they so choose, to: (1)
Register and supervise AMCs; and (2) add information about AMCs in
their State to the National Registry of AMCs (AMC Registry).\7\ States
electing to register and supervise AMCs under Section 1117 must
implement minimum requirements in accordance with the AMC Rule.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 12 U.S.C. 3346.
\7\ Title XI as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act defines
``appraisal management company'' to mean, in part, an external third
party that oversees a network or panel of more than 15 appraisers,
who are State certified or licensed in a State, or 25 or more
appraisers nationally (two or more States) within a given year. (See
12 U.S.C. 3350(11)). Title XI as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act also
allows States to adopt requirements in addition to those in the AMC
Rule. (See 12 U.S.C. 3353(b)). For example, States may decide to
supervise entities that provide appraisal management services, but
do not meet the size thresholds of the Title XI definition of AMC.
If a State has a more expansive regulatory framework that covers
entities that provide appraisal management services but do not meet
the Title XI definition of AMC, the State should only submit
information regarding AMCs meeting the Title XI definition to the
AMC Registry.
\8\ The Dodd-Frank Act added section 1124 to Title XI, Appraisal
Management Company Minimum Requirements, which required the Office
of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC); Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System (Board); Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC); National Credit Union Administration (NCUA);
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau); and Federal
Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to establish, by rule, minimum
requirements for the registration and supervision of AMCs by States
that elect to register and supervise AMCs pursuant to Title XI and
the rules promulgated thereunder. The Agencies issued a final rule
(AMC Rule) with an effective date of August 10, 2015. (80 FR 32658,
June 9, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1103 of Title XI,\9\ Functions of Appraisal Subcommittee,
was amended by the Dodd-Frank Act to require the ASC to maintain the
AMC Registry of those AMCs that are either:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 12 U.S.C. 3332.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Registered with and subject to supervision by a State that has
elected to register and supervise AMCs; or (2) are operating
subsidiaries of a Federally regulated financial institution (Federally
regulated AMCs). On or before the effective date of this rule, the ASC
will issue an ASC Bulletin to States that will address:
1. When the AMC Registry will be open for States; and
2. Reporting requirements (information required to be submitted by
States in order to register AMCs on the AMC Registry) with the
effective date for compliance.
Title XI as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act imposes a statutory
restriction on performance of services by AMCs for a federally related
transaction (FRT) \10\ that applies after a 36-month period that began
when the AMC Rule became effective (Implementation Period).\11\ The ASC
recognizes that States electing to register and supervise AMCs may need
to amend their rules and/or regulations, or revise their operating
procedures in order to implement AMC registry fees. Given the limited
period of time between publication of this final rule and the
expiration of the Implementation Period, States may not be able to
implement the AMC registry fees within the Implementation Period. As
discussed further below in the subsection Collection and transmission
of annual AMC registry fees, only those AMCs whose registry fees have
been transmitted to the ASC are eligible to be on the AMC Registry.
While the ASC encourages States that elect to register and supervise
AMCs to begin collecting fees from registered AMCs as soon as possible
in accordance with the requirements of Section 1109 of Title XI so that
those AMCs may be entered on the AMC Registry, the restriction on
performance of services for FRTs will not impact an AMC so long as the
AMC is registered with a State that has elected to register and
supervise AMCs, or is subject to oversight by a Federal financial
institutions regulatory agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ A federally related transaction includes any real estate-
related financial transaction which: (a) A Federal financial
institutions regulatory agency engages in, contracts for, or
regulates; and (b) requires the services of an appraiser. See Title
XI sec. 1121 (4), 12 U.S.C. 3350), implemented by the OCC: 12 CFR
34.42(f) and 34.43(a); Board: 12 CFR 225.62(f) and 225.63(a); FDIC:
12 CFR 323.2(f) and 323.3(a); and NCUA: 12 CFR 722.2(f) and
722.3(a). Based on 2014 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data, at
least 90 percent of residential mortgage loan originations are not
subject to the Title XI appraisal regulations. (FFIEC report to
Congress, Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act, 82
FR 15900 (March 30, 2017).
\11\ See 12 U.S.C. 3353(f)(1). In summary, beginning 36 months
from the effective date of the AMC Rule, an AMC, as defined by Title
XI, may not provide services for FRTs in a State unless the AMC is
registered with the State pursuant to a registration and supervision
program established under Section 1117, or is subject to oversight
by a Federal financial institutions regulatory agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 20, 2016, the ASC published a proposed rule with a 60-day
public comment period on implementation of the annual AMC registry fee
that States would collect and transmit to the ASC if they elect to
register and supervise AMCs.\12\ This final rule sets the fee formula
that States would apply in collecting annual AMC registry fees and
transmitting those fees to the ASC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 81 FR 31868 (May 20, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. The Final Rule
The final rule: (1) Establishes the annual AMC registry fee in
section 1109 of Title XI for AMCs in those States electing to register
and supervise AMCs; and (2) implements collection and transmission of
AMC registry fees as required by section 1109. The final rule sets
forth the ASC's interpretation of the phrase ``working for or
contracting with'' for purposes of calculating the annual AMC registry
fee.
[[Page 44495]]
For the reasons discussed in section III of this SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION, the final rule adopts the rule substantially as proposed.
The final rule contains technical, nonsubstantive changes.
III. The Final Rule and Public Comments on the Proposed Rule
The following is a section-by-section review of the proposed rule
and a discussion of the public comments received by the ASC concerning
the proposal. The ASC received 104 comment letters in response to the
published proposal. These comment letters were received from State
appraiser certifying and licensing agencies, AMCs, appraiser and real
estate trade associations, professional associations, appraisal firms
and appraisers.
A. Section 1102.401 Definitions
The ASC requested comment on all aspects of the proposed rule. The
following is a discussion of the definitions, related public comments
and issues relating to those definitions. Definitions on which the ASC
did not receive comment are not discussed below and are adopted without
change in the final rule.
The ASC is adopting the definitions substantially as proposed,
including cross-references to the definitions established in the AMC
Rule. Several commenters requested that the cross-referenced
definitions be included in the final rule rather than as proposed by
cross reference to definitions in the AMC Rule. However, if the ASC
were to adopt the approach suggested by these commenters, in the event
those AMC Rule definitions are amended by the interagency process in
the future, definitions included in this rule would become inaccurate
and inconsistent. To avoid that circumstance, the ASC is adopting the
definitions as proposed with cross-reference to those definitions
established by the AMC Rule.
One commenter expressed concern over the definition of ``appraiser
panel'' stating AMCs should not be penalized over other providers of
appraisal services, and included discussion on appraisal firms and
AMCs. This commenter quoted language from the AMC Rule on appraisal
firms. Another commenter expressed concern that the definition of
``appraiser panel'' should only include independent contractors and not
employees. The issues raised by these commenters were determined in the
interagency AMC Rule during that rulemaking process.
Proposed Sec. 1102.401(d) defined performance of an appraisal.
Proposed Sec. 1102.401(d) is being corrected to define performed an
appraisal, which conforms to the actual phrase used throughout the
rule, to mean the appraisal service requested of an appraiser by the
AMC was provided to the AMC. The ASC is adopting this definition
without substantive change as Sec. 1102.401(d) in the final rule. One
commenter questioned whether this referred to initial submission of the
report or when the appraisal has been reviewed and accepted by the
client in its final form. The ASC recognizes that the issue may be
complicated by the ongoing debate within the profession concerning when
an appraisal is complete. The ASC is adopting the definition as
proposed, intending for the terms to remain subject to a plain English
interpretation. Another commenter requested a definition of ``appraisal
service'' be included in the final rule. The ASC recognizes that
various appraisal services could be requested, including an appraisal
review, and therefore declines to define the phrase, recognizing that
States can be more restrictive. In general, commenters supported the
proposed definition.
Establishing the Annual AMC Registry Fee
The ASC is adopting proposed Sec. 1102.402 without change. Section
1102.402 establishes the annual AMC registry fee for States that elect
to register and supervise AMCs as follows:
(1) In the case of an AMC that has been in existence for more than
a year, $25 multiplied by the number of appraisers who have performed
an appraisal for the AMC on a covered transaction in such State during
the previous year; and (2) in the case of an AMC that has not been in
existence for more than a year, $25 multiplied by the number of
appraisers who have performed an appraisal for the AMC on a covered
transaction in such State since the AMC commenced doing business.
For AMCs that have been in existence for more than a year, section
1109 of Title XI provides that the annual AMC registry fee is based on
the number of appraisers ``working for or contracting with'' an AMC in
a State during a 12-month period multiplied by $25, but where such $25
amount may be adjusted up to a maximum of $50.\13\ The final rule
adopts the minimum fee of $25 as set by statute and interprets the
phrase ``working for or contracting with'' to mean those appraisers on
an AMC appraiser panel that performed an appraisal for the AMC on a
covered transaction during the previous year in a particular State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Title XI sec. 1109(a)(4)(B), 12 U.S.C. 3338(a)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For AMCs that have not been in existence for more than a year, the
statute requires a determination by the ASC of an appropriate
multiplier to calculate registry fees for those AMCs. The ASC proposed
to use the same factors of $25 multiplied by the number of appraisers
that performed an appraisal for the AMC on a covered transaction, but
the fee would be based on the actual period of time since the AMC
commenced doing business rather than 12 months. For example, if an AMC
has been operating for 6 months, the fee would be calculated by
multiplying $25 by the number of appraisers that performed an appraisal
for the AMC on a covered transaction during that 6-month period.
One commenter stated the ASC should identify what it will do with
revenue from AMC registry fees and suggested the ASC should consider
decreasing the fee to less than $25 which would still allow the ASC
plenty of funds to perform its Title XI-related functions. The
commenter asserted the ASC has discretion to do so. However, section
1109(a)(4), by its plain terms, sets the minimum fee allowed under the
statutory framework at $25. The statute did provide latitude for the
ASC to establish an appropriate number to multiply by $25 for AMCs that
have not been in existence for more than a year. Using the actual
period of time since the AMC commenced doing business will maintain
some consistency in the calculation of AMC registry fees to reduce
administrative burden for the States. Based on the ASC's anticipated
costs of overseeing States that elect to register and supervise AMCs,
as well as the ASC's anticipated costs of maintaining the AMC Registry,
the ASC believes the proposed annual AMC registry fee would cover those
costs while supporting other Title XI functions of the ASC as mandated
by Congress, and in particular, further development of its grant
programs, particularly to support States as funds are available.
The ASC considered three options with respect to interpreting the
phrase ``working for or contracting with.'' Under the first option, the
phrase ``working for or contracting with'' would have been interpreted
to include every appraiser on an AMC appraiser panel during the
reporting period \14\ in
[[Page 44496]]
a particular State. The multiplier in this option would have included
all appraisers on an AMC's appraiser panel in a particular State,
including appraisers accepted by the AMC for consideration for future
appraisal assignments. One commenter stated this option would likely
penalize AMCs for adding appraisers to their roster for future use, and
would also be burdensome for States. Another commenter stated the
interpretation under the first option would be the easiest for States.
The ASC remains concerned that this option would impose the most burden
to AMCs and impose the highest registry fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ In the case of AMCs that have been in existence for more
than a year, the reporting period would be 12 months. In the case of
an AMC that has not been in existence for more than a year, the
reporting period would be since the AMC commenced doing business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the second option, the phrase ``working for or contracting
with'' would have been interpreted to include those appraisers engaged
by the AMC to perform an appraisal on a covered transaction during the
reporting period in a particular State. Under this option, those
appraisers engaged by the AMC to perform an appraisal, regardless of
whether the appraiser completed the appraisal during the reporting
period, would be included in the calculation of the AMC's registry
fees.
The ASC requested comment on the second option's interpretation of
the phrase ``working for or contracting with'' and whether this would
be an easier interpretation for the States to administer. (See Question
3 in the proposal.) Several commenters expressed concern over this
option. One commenter stated that AMCs could reduce their panel sizes,
thereby creating slower turnaround times and utilizing fewer
appraisers. Another commenter stated the interpretation under the
second option would not be easier to implement and States would have to
rely on AMCs self reporting this information. Another commenter
expressed concern that the second option could penalize AMCs if an
order is accepted and assigned but later cancelled and neither the AMC
or the appraiser receive any compensation, and could also be burdensome
for States to enforce without having a status of assignments and their
completion during a given timeframe.
Under the third option, which is adopted in the final rule, the
phrase ``working for or contracting with'' includes those appraisers
that performed an appraisal for the AMC on a covered transaction during
the reporting period in a particular State. This option excludes
appraisers accepted by the AMC for consideration for future appraisal
assignments as well as appraisers who performed appraisals in the past,
but did not perform any appraisals in the reporting period. The AMC
registry fee is not intended to result in an appraiser being counted
twice in calculating the fee, regardless of how many appraisals that
appraiser performed in a single State during a reporting period. A few
commenters misunderstood the proposed application of the fee and
thought the fee would be calculated based on the total number of
individual appraisers on an AMC panel, or that the fee would be imposed
based on individual appraisals, neither of which is consistent with the
proposal or the final rule.
Several commenters expressed support for the third option as having
the least economic impact to an AMC, the least burden for appraisers
and preferable from a State administrative point of view. A few
commenters expressed support for the third option but believed it would
be a burden for States to collect information from AMCs. One commenter,
while stating the third option is costly to AMCs, stated that the third
option would be the most equitable as it applies to those appraisers
who had completed appraisal assignments, and that the first two options
may cause AMCs to pare their appraiser panels. One commenter stated the
third option would also simplify the queries that States would need to
run to report all registered AMCs that have completed appraisal reports
during a specific year or timeframe. Another commenter stated AMCs may
use fewer appraisers for appraisal assignments to keep AMC registry
fees down. The ASC anticipates there may well be such responses by AMCs
to reduce their registry fees, but under the statutory framework, it is
seemingly unavoidable.
The ASC requested comment on the ASC's interpretation of the phrase
``working for or contracting with.'' (See Question 2 in the proposal.)
One commenter expressed concern that for AMCs in business less than 12
months, determining how many appraisals have been performed could be
difficult. Another commenter suggested ``working for'' and
``contracting with'' should be properly defined with specifics and
parameters. One commenter requested clarification of the term ``working
for,'' and another commenter, while supporting the third option,
commented the term ``performed'' needs clarity, suggesting appraisals
could be considered ``performed'' when delivered by the AMC to the
client. The ASC recognizes that because the AMC is acting as an agent
of the appraiser's client, delivery of an appraisal to the AMC could
also be deemed delivery to the client. The ASC is adopting the
interpretation as proposed, intending for the terms to remain subject
to a plain English interpretation.
The ASC also requested comment on what aspects of the proposed
rule, if any, would be challenging for States to implement and any
alternative approaches that would make implementation easier, while
maintaining consistency with the statute. (See Question 8 in the
proposal.) Several commenters expressed concern that the proposed rule
would create significant administrative burden on the State to
calculate and verify registry fees, and would also result in
expenditures to administer and transmit the registry fees. Some
commenters are opposed to the fee in general, while a few expressed
opposition to AMCs. A few commenters suggested no action should be
taken until the Dodd-Frank Act is amended. One commenter stated the ASC
should seek legislative changes to 12 U.S.C. 3338 asserting it is
fundamentally flawed, and requested withdrawal of the proposed rule
until the federal statute is changed. The ASC, however, is charged with
implementation of the statute as passed by Congress.
One commenter stated that the 500 hours of regulatory burden is
understated, and added States should be reimbursed for expenses in
collecting and transmitting registry fees. Another commenter also
stated that the 500 hours is underestimated stating the ASC failed to
consider administrative costs and expenses for creating and maintaining
a database, and for the staff time to run the program. The ASC is
working to minimize such burden in simplifying the reporting
requirements for AMCs. As stated in the proposal, the ASC will issue a
Bulletin to address reporting requirements with the effective date for
compliance.
Another commenter foresees several barriers to collecting reliable
data on how many appraisers are on an AMC panel and how many have done
work for the AMC in the previous 12 months, including the necessity to
adopt new rules, create new forms and update current IT systems to
collect and maintain this data, all of which will result in increased
labor costs for staff needed for implementation of the proposed rule.
As stated in the proposed rule, the ASC anticipates further development
of its grants program, particularly in support of the States as funds
are available. The statutory purpose of ASC grants to the States is to
provide funds to assist States in compliance with Title XI. Therefore,
as
[[Page 44497]]
funds are available, the ASC could consider establishing a grant to
assist States in registry reporting requirements and transmission of
registry fees for both appraisers and AMCs. Another commenter suggested
the ASC should provide a revenue projection as well as costs to develop
the AMC Registry. The ASC has included those expenses in its budget
process and will continue to do so on an annual basis.
Another commenter opposed the interpretation of ``working for or
contracting with,'' stating it will create an entirely new regulatory
criterion for States to implement and validate, thereby requiring
audits. It should be noted that there is no federal requirement for
States to audit AMCs to determine validity of information submitted to
the State. A State may determine to periodically audit, or not to
exercise such authority at all, or alternatively, a State may rely on
the complaint/investigation process to determine if and when an audit
is warranted.
By far the majority of comments received expressed concern over
these additional fees and the impact on appraisers if the fee is passed
on to them by the AMCs. More specifically, these commenters requested
that the final rule prohibit AMCs from passing the fee on to
appraisers. While the ASC shares in the concern expressed over the fee
being passed on to appraisers, such regulation of AMCs is outside of
the authority of the ASC. The ASC notes the fee imposed by statute is
not a fee assessed on appraisers, but rather on AMCs. Some commenters
identified certain States are already attempting to regulate this at
the State level. One commenter, however, stated the choice to pass the
fee on to the appraiser should be left to the AMC, and that appraisers
have a choice whether to participate on an AMC panel.
Some commenters expressed concern that AMCs hide their appraisal
management fees from borrowers by including them as part of the fee
paid to appraisers, and requested that the final rule require fees be
disclosed to the borrower. This, however, is outside the authority of
the ASC. Comments were also received expressing concern over AMCs not
paying customary and reasonable fees to appraisers, or charging
appraisers various fees to be on an AMC panel. This too is outside the
authority of the ASC.
One commenter suggested consideration of a de minimis exception,
stating the ASC should allow AMCs to use the IRS 1099 threshold and
thus exclude those appraisers to whom it pays less than $600 during a
tax year, which would include appraisers who performed only one
appraisal assignment, and perhaps up to three. The commenter suggests
its proposal as an alternative to potentially reduce AMC registry fees.
However, the ASC would not have authority under the statute to provide
such an exception, particularly in the case of AMCs that have been in
existence for more than a year. Furthermore, the ASC is concerned there
would be undesirable consequences. For example, there could be a
reduction in appraiser fees in order to avoid the proposed threshold.
Additionally, AMCs might select appraisers in a manner to avoid the
threshold rather than basing a selection on competency. The ASC will
continue to work with States to address increased burden and will
continue to explore means to provide additional grant funding to the
States to support State programs as funds are available and additional
grant policies and procedures are developed and approved.
A few commenters expressed preference for a flat fee to avoid any
need to verify that AMCs are sending in the correct amount, another
commenter suggested a two-tiered system and another commenter suggested
a tiered structure based on the size of the appraiser panel and/or the
volume of appraisals brokered by an AMC. The ASC considered these
various options to calculating the AMC registry fee, but concluded that
such options were not supported by the statute. Also, the ASC notes, in
response to several commenters expressing concern over the honor system
versus auditing AMCs on information provided to the State by AMCs, that
it is up to the State to determine whatever process the State deems
appropriate.
Two commenters stated the AMC registry fee should be calculated
based on FRTs, not covered transactions. The ASC believes the proposal
is consistent with the AMC Rule and the statute. The AMC Rule defined a
covered transaction as any consumer credit transaction secured by the
consumer's principal dwelling.\15\ As stated in the AMC Rule preamble,
the definition did not limit the definition of covered transaction to
FRTs, even though Title XI and its implementing regulations have
applied historically only to appraisals for FRTs. The AMC Rule, through
the interagency process, determined that defining ``covered
transaction'' as such reflected the statutory text of section 1121(11),
which defines the term ``appraisal management company,'' as in
pertinent part, ``any external third party authorized either by a
creditor of a consumer credit transaction secured by the consumer's
principal dwelling or by an underwriter of or other principal in the
secondary mortgage markets.'' \16\ It was further stated in the AMC
Rule preamble that applying coverage of the AMC Rule beyond FRTs was
consistent with the structure and text of other parts of Title XI,
section 1124, most of which address appraisals generally rather than
appraisals only for FRTs, and in particular, the text of section
1124(a)(4) of Title XI indicates that one of the chief purposes of the
minimum requirements for AMCs is to ensure compliance with the
valuation independence standards established pursuant to section 129E
of the Truth and Lending Act (TILA) (15 U.S.C. 1639e).\17\ The preamble
of the AMC Rule concluded that those standards apply to AMCs whenever
they engage in a consumer credit transaction secured by the consumer's
principal dwelling, regardless of whether the transaction is a FRT.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See 12 CFR 34.211(h); 12 CFR 225.191(h); 12 CFR 323.9(h);
12 CFR 1222.21(h) (2015).
\16\ See 80 FR 32658, 32664 (June 9, 2015).
\17\ See Title XI sec. 1124(a)(4), 12 U.S.C. 3353(a)(4).
\18\ See 80 FR 32658, 32664 (June 9, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another commenter questioned the benefit of the AMC Registry to the
industry as a whole. The ASC notes the requirement for the ASC to
maintain the AMC Registry is statutory. The benefit of the Registry
initially will be to promote information sharing between States on
AMCs. The Registry will also allow lenders, AMCs and other stakeholders
to identify AMCs that are located in participating States, and
therefore subject to State registration and supervision. In addition,
the Registry will identify AMCs that are Federally regulated AMCs.
Collection and Transmission of Annual AMC Registry Fees
The ASC is adopting Sec. 1102.403(a) and (b) substantially as
proposed regarding collection and transmission of annual AMC registry
fees. On or before the effective date of this rule, the ASC will issue
an ASC Bulletin to States that will address:
1. When the AMC Registry will be open for States; and
2. Reporting requirements (information required to be submitted by
States in order to register AMCs on the AMC Registry) with the
effective date for compliance.
Section 1102.403(a) and (b) implement collection and transmission
of annual AMC registry fees for States that elect to register and
supervise AMCs following the statutory scheme
[[Page 44498]]
set forth in sections 1109 and 1117 of Title XI as amended by the Dodd-
Frank Act. The final rule requires AMC registry fees to be collected
and transmitted to the ASC on an annual basis by States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs. Only those AMCs whose registry fees have
been transmitted to the ASC are eligible to be on the AMC Registry.
The ASC requested comment on all aspects of proposed collection and
transmission of annual AMC registry fees. (See Question 4 in the
proposal.) One commenter stated that while it is understandable that
States should have some flexibility in connection with the collection
of registry fees, some boundaries or guidelines should be implemented
within the final rule because varying State expiration dates could be
financially and logistically challenging for AMCs. One commenter stated
that the staggered renewal dates could complicate the reporting process
and may be a burden to AMCs and States to maintain records. The
commenter suggested the reporting period should be the same for every
State. As proposed, the ASC recognizes that States should have the
flexibility to align a one-year period with any 12-month period, which
may or may not be based on the calendar year. Based on annual fees paid
by the States historically for appraiser registry fees, the ASC
recognizes States require flexibility to determine the period for
reporting and collection of registry fees dependent on their budget
cycles, rules and statutes. States vary greatly on the 12-month cycle
as well as renewal cycles, which in some States may be 2 years or more.
Just as many States do not use a calendar year for their existing
appraiser credentialing process, the ASC believes that allowing States
to set the 12-month period provides appropriate flexibility and will
help States comply with the collection and transmission of AMC fees and
reduce regulatory burden for State governments. States may choose to do
this in a similar manner as they currently do for their appraisers,
meaning some States have a date certain every year, while other States
use, for example, the appraiser's date of birth (States could use AMC
registration date similarly). The registration cycle is left to the
individual States to determine, but the ASC notes that the statutory
requirement in section 1109(a)(4) requires States to submit AMC
registry fees to the ASC annually.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Title XI sec. 1109(a)(4)(B), 12 U.S.C. 3338(a)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several other commenters expressed concern over the additional
burden on States to collect and transmit information and fees to the
ASC and the need for additional funding and staff. Another commenter
stated the ASC should consider implementing a centralized computer
system for collecting AMC registry fees, and use some of the fees to
provide grants to States to set up and run their AMC programs. The ASC
will continue to work with States to address increased burden and will
continue to explore means to provide additional grant funding to the
States to support State programs as funds are available and additional
grant policies and procedures are developed and approved.
One commenter objected to States levying additional fees on AMCs to
cover the costs of collecting and transmitting fees to the ASC. This
commenter referenced the AMC Rule stating in its preamble the option
for States to collect administrative fees from Federally regulated AMCs
to offset the cost of collecting the AMC Registry fee and the
information related to the fee. The ASC understands the basis for the
concern, but recognizes this is a matter left to the States.
The ASC requested comment on Federally regulated AMCs operating in
a State that does not elect to register and supervise AMCs, and whether
the ASC should collect information and fees directly from those
Federally regulated AMCs. (See Question 5 in the proposal.) The ASC
received a number of comments in response to this question. One
commenter expressed concerns about collecting fees from Federally
regulated AMCs which are exempt from registration with the State.
Another commenter stated that Federally regulated AMCs operating in a
State that does not have an AMC program should report and submit fees
directly to the ASC. A few commenters stated that the State would not
have authority to collect fees from entities that are exempt from State
licensure and they do not have authority to require that those entities
submit data to the State Board and requested that the ASC collect the
fees from those entities directly. Several commenters stated the ASC
should collect fees directly from Federally regulated AMCs rather than
the State acting as a pass-through. One commenter stated if the ASC
sets up a program to collect fees from Federally regulated AMCs in
States that do not register and supervise AMCs, the ASC should consider
the same for States with an AMC program. Another commenter stated that
States could choose to opt out due to the reported low percentage of
FRTs compared to overall transactions, which would result in a barrier
to collection of fees in those States. The ASC considered commenters'
concerns, but recognizes the authority to impose requirements on
Federally regulated AMCs lies with the Agencies.\20\ The ASC will work
with the Agencies to address these concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ OCC, Board, FDIC, NCUA, Bureau, and FHFA (see footnote 8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some commenters expressed concern that even though they elect to
register and supervise AMCs, they would have no authority over
Federally regulated AMCs, and therefore no ability to accept
information or fees from those AMCs. The ASC recognizes this may
present a challenge for some States. However, for States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs, the requirement to collect fees from
Federally regulated AMCs is statutory. The Agencies \21\ involved with
issuing the AMC Rule recognized that practical challenges may arise as
the minimum requirements are adopted in States and reporting
requirements take effect and the Agencies committed to monitor these
issues. The ASC will monitor these issues as well and will continue to
explore means to provide additional grant funding to the States to
support State programs as funds are available and additional grant
policies and procedures are developed and approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ASC requested comment on what barriers, if any, exist that
would make it difficult for a State to implement the collection and
transmission of AMC registry fees (see Question 6 in the proposal) and
what costs, both direct in terms of fees and indirect in terms of
administrative costs, would be associated with collection and
transmission of AMC registry fees (see Question 7 in the proposal). One
commenter estimated that the burden for a State's program would be 25
hours per month of staff time to complete and would cost approximately
$6000 to design a database and $700/month for staff to maintain.
Another commenter stated the proposed rule could negatively affect
AMCs, consumers and real estate appraisers, as well as create burden
for States. This commenter also stated AMCs will likely pass on fees to
clients and therefore consumers. Another commenter stated costs may
negatively affect smaller AMCs causing consolidation of AMCs. Another
concern was that AMCs may pare down appraiser panels. The ASC
recognizes the collection and transmission to the ASC of AMC registry
fees by the States would create some recordkeeping, reporting and
compliance requirements.
[[Page 44499]]
However, these collection and transmission requirements are imposed by
the statute. The ASC will continue to work with States to address
increased burden and will continue to explore means to provide
additional grant funding to the States to support State programs as
funds are available and additional grant policies and procedures are
developed and approved.
Several commenters requested that States should be allowed to send
in multi-year registry fees rather than annually. Another commenter
expressed concern that States could incur significant administrative
costs to implement programming changes to their computer systems if
they have to collect fees annually rather than multi-year fees as they
do now for appraisers. If a State can assess on a multi-year basis, the
ASC would not object. However, the ASC notes that the statutory
requirement in section 1109(a)(4) requires States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs to submit AMC registry fees to the ASC
annually.\22\ For clarification purposes, language that was included at
the end of proposed section 1102.403(b) referencing the ``12-month
period subsequent to payment of the fee'' has been removed to avoid
conflict should a State assess the fee on a multi-year basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Title XI sec. 1109(a)(4)(B), 12 U.S.C. 3338(a)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another commenter expressed the desire for the ASC to continue to
accept data files for AMCs. Historically, the ASC accepted data files,
and continues to do so on a limited basis for the Appraiser Registry.
However, this method of transmitting rosters is obsolete and time
consuming. The ASC has continued to improve the Appraiser Registry
using more up-to-date transmission methods such as the extranet
application and Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) in order to
provide more real-time information on the National Registries. While
the ASC recognizes this may impose additional burden on States, the ASC
will continue to explore means to provide grant funding to the States
to support State programs as funds are available and additional grant
policies and procedures are developed and approved.
Another commenter was concerned with specific collection and
transmission scenarios and how various scenarios would impact
determination of fees, calculation of panel size, transmission of fees,
verification of fee calculation and audit requirements. Several of this
commenter's concerns deal with logistics and will be part of the ASC
Bulletin concerning reporting requirements which will be issued after
this final rule. This commenter also wanted to know what timeline the
ASC is considering between verification and remittance, similar to
another commenter who stated there should be flexibility with the
timing of payment of fees and the actual transmission of the fees, and
that the final rule should add additional language that clearly
addresses these potential gaps in order to avoid any unintended
consequences. This is a matter that will be left to the States to
administer within the following parameters: (1) AMC registry fees must
be collected and transmitted to the ASC on an annual basis by States
that elect to register and supervise AMCs; and (2) only those AMCs
whose registry fees have been transmitted to the ASC are eligible to be
on the AMC Registry.
IV. Regulatory Analysis
Paperwork Reduction Act
Certain provisions of the final rule contain ``information
collection'' requirements within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Under the PRA, the ASC may
not conduct or sponsor, and, notwithstanding any other provision of
law, a person is not required to respond to, an information collection
unless the information collection displays a valid Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) control number. The information collection
requirements contained in this final rule were submitted to OMB for
review and approval at the proposed rule stage by the ASC pursuant to
section 3506 of the PRA and section 1320.11 of the OMB's implementing
regulations (5 CFR part 1320). OMB instructed the ASC to examine public
comment in response to the proposed rule and describe in the supporting
statement of their next collections any public comments received
regarding the collection as well as why (or why it did not) incorporate
the commenter's recommendation. The ASC received 12 public comments
regarding the collection and concern of burden on States, and two
comments voiced concern that the ASC did not perform a cost benefit
analysis. The ASC described the comments in the supporting statement
above and the discussion below on the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and
addressed why the ASC did not incorporate commenters' recommendations.
The collection of information requirements in the final rule are found
in Sec. Sec. 1102.400-1102.403. This information is required to
implement section 1473 of the Dodd-Frank Act.
Title of Information Collection: Collection and Transmission of
Annual AMC Registry Fees.
OMB Control Nos.: The ASC will be seeking new control numbers for
these collections.
Frequency of Response: Event generated.
Affected Public: States; businesses or other for-profit and not-
for-profit organizations.
Abstract
State Recordkeeping Requirements
States that elect to register and supervise AMCs are required to
collect and transmit annual AMC registry fees to the ASC. Section
1102.402 establishes the annual AMC registry fee for States that elect
to register and supervise AMCs as follows: (1) In the case of an AMC
that has been in existence for more than a year, $25 multiplied by the
number of appraisers who have performed an appraisal for the AMC on a
covered transaction in such State during the previous year; and (2) in
the case of an AMC that has not been in existence for more than a year,
$25 multiplied by the number of appraisers who have performed an
appraisal for the AMC on a covered transaction in such State since the
AMC commenced doing business.
Section 1102.403 requires AMC registry fees to be collected and
transmitted to the ASC on an annual basis by States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs. Only those AMCs whose registry fees have
been transmitted to the ASC will be eligible to be on the AMC Registry.
Section 1102.403 clarifies that States may align a one-year period with
any 12-month period, which may, or may not, be based on the calendar
year. The registration cycle is left to the individual States to
determine.
State Reporting Burden
Section 1103 of Title XI, Functions of Appraisal Subcommittee, was
amended by the Dodd-Frank Act to require the ASC to maintain a registry
of AMCs that are either: (1) Registered with and subject to supervision
by a State; or (2) Federally regulated AMCs. On or before the effective
date of this rule, the ASC will issue an ASC Bulletin to States that
will address:
1. When the AMC Registry will be open for States; and
2. Reporting requirements (information required to be submitted by
States in order to register AMCs on the AMC Registry) with the
effective date for compliance.
[[Page 44500]]
Burden Estimates:
Total Number of Respondents: 500 AMCs, 55 States.
Burden Total: 500 hours.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
generally requires that, in connection with a rulemaking, an agency
prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the impact of the proposed rule on small
entities. However, the regulatory flexibility analysis otherwise
required under the RFA is not required if an agency certifies that the
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities and publishes its certification
and a brief explanatory statement in the Federal Register together with
the rule. Based on its analysis, and for the reasons stated below, the
ASC believes that the rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
Section 1109 of Title XI provides that State appraiser certifying
and licensing agencies that elect to register and supervise AMCs shall
collect (1) from AMCs that have been in existence for more than a year,
annual AMC registry fees in the amount of $25 (up to a maximum of $50)
multiplied by the number of appraisers ``working for or contracting
with'' an AMC in a State during the previous year; and (2) from AMCs
that have not been in existence for more than a year, annual AMC
registry fees in the amount of $25 (up to a maximum of $50) multiplied
by an appropriate number to be determined by the ASC.\23\ The purpose
of the statutory fee is to support the ASC's functions under Title XI.
Because the ASC believes the minimum fee required by the statute would
be adequate to support its functions, the rule adopts the minimum fee
of $25 as set by statute. The rule also interprets the phrase ``working
for or contracting with'' to mean those appraisers that performed an
appraisal for the AMC on a covered transaction during the reporting
period. For AMCs that have existed for more than a year, the formula is
$25 multiplied by the number of appraisers who have performed an
appraisal for the AMC on a covered transaction during the previous
year. For AMCs that have not existed for more than a year, the $25 fee
is multiplied by the number of appraisers that performed an appraisal
for the AMC on a covered transaction since the AMC commenced doing
business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See 12 U.S.C. 3338(a)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the fee for AMCs that have been in existence for more
than a year, the ASC believes the rule imposes the minimum fee allowed
under the statutory provisions of section 1109. The ASC did not
exercise statutory discretion granted to the ASC to increase the fee
above $25. Further, the ASC interprets ``working for or contracting
with'' to mean only those appraisers who actually performed an
appraisal for the AMC, as opposed to all appraisers on the AMC's panel
or all appraisers engaged, regardless of whether the assignment was
completed. The ASC believes this formula results in the lowest fee
allowed by the statute and the ASC chose not to exercise its authority
to increase this minimum fee. Therefore, any burden produced is the
result of statutory and not regulatory requirements.
The ASC has also decided to adopt the statutory minimum fee of $25
for AMCs that have not existed for more than a year. As required by
statute, the ASC adopted an appropriate number against which to
multiply the $25 fee. The ASC adopted the same multiple as used for
AMCs that have existed for more than a year (i.e., the number of
appraisers that have performed appraisal assignments for the AMC). It
is possible that the ASC may have been able to adopt a multiple that
would have resulted in a lower fee and would still be deemed
appropriate. In this regard, the rule may have created a burden for
AMCs that have not existed for more than a year, beyond the burden
created by the statutory requirements alone. However, using the actual
period of time since the AMC commenced doing business will maintain
some consistency in the calculation of AMC registry fees to reduce
administrative burden for the States.
One commenter stated the proposed rule would have a large financial
impact on smaller AMCs and community banks and credit unions, as well
as appraisers, and asserted that the RFA requires analysis when the
rule directly regulates small entities. This commenter stated that as
an owner of a small AMC, regulatory fees proposed are burdensome, and
as a national AMC, is opposed to paying for the same appraiser in
different States, especially given that the AMC registry fee is on top
of other State fees required by the States, and regulatory oversight
seems ``duplicitous.'' Another commenter stated the proposed rule would
affect thousands of small appraisal businesses as a result of AMCs
passing the registry fee on to appraisers, and that the ASC should do
extensive analysis on how the proposed rule will affect residential
appraisers. The ASC shares in the concern but has no authority to
regulate that issue. A few commenters indicated that some States are
looking at regulating this issue at the State level. In support of
those States, the ASC notes the fee imposed by statute is not a fee
assessed on appraisers, but rather on AMCs. This commenter, similar to
the previous commenter, also did not believe the requirements of
section 609(a) of the RFA have been met and that the fee may force
small AMCs out of business, as well as impact sole proprietorships that
accept assignments from AMCs. This commenter went on to state that
while the ASC is not required to adhere to Executive Order 12866 or
issue cost benefit analysis, this commenter believes it is sound best
practice.
The ASC carefully considered these matters and concluded
requirements under the rule are imposed by the statute, not the rule,
and further, the requirements apply to those States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs following the statutory scheme set forth in
section 1473 of the Dodd-Frank Act. In addition, the RFA does not
require an agency to conduct a small-entity impact analysis when the
agency does not regulate the affected entities (AMCs, lenders,
appraisers). The ASC's statutory oversight extends to State certifying
and licensing agencies. Section 1109 of Title XI provides the framework
and minimum fee to collect from AMCs for States that elect to register
and supervise AMCs. The ASC believes the rule as proposed imposes the
minimum fee of $25 allowed under the statutory provisions of section
1109. The statute did provide latitude for the ASC to establish an
appropriate number to multiply by $25 for AMCs that have not been in
existence for a year. Using the actual period of time since the AMC
commenced doing business will maintain some consistency in the
calculation of AMC registry fees to reduce administrative burden for
the States. The ASC did not exercise statutory discretion granted to
the ASC to increase the fee above $25. Therefore, any burden produced
is the result of statutory and not regulatory requirements.
While some burden beyond the statutory requirements may have
resulted from the rule for AMCs that have not existed for more than a
year, the ASC does not believe the rule will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. There are
only approximately 500 AMCs operating in the United States. The
[[Page 44501]]
annual regulatory burden will only apply to new AMCs that have not
existed for more than a year. Given the small number of AMCs currently
in operation, it is unlikely that there will be a substantial number of
AMCs that commence doing business in any given year. Further, the ASC
adopted the lowest possible fee of $25. Therefore, the ASC does not
believe that the exercise of its discretion in setting the fee formula
for such AMCs will have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The collection and transmission to the ASC of AMC registry fees by
the States would create some recordkeeping, reporting and compliance
requirements. However, these collection and transmission requirements
are imposed by the statute, not the rule. Further, the RFA requires an
agency to perform a regulatory flexibility analysis of small entity
impacts when the agency's rule directly regulates the small
entities.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ For purposes of assessing the impacts of the proposed rule
on small entities, ``small entities'' is defined in the RFA to
include small businesses, small not-for-profit organizations, and
small government jurisdictions. See 5 U.S.C. 601(6). A ``small
business'' is determined by application of SBA regulations and
reference to the North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) classifications and size standards. See 5 U.S.C. 601(3). A
``small organization'' is any ``not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.''
5 U.S.C. 601(4). A ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is the
government of a city, county, town, township, village, school
district, or special district with a population of less than 50,000.
See 5 U.S.C. 601(5). Given these definitions, States that elect to
establish licensing and certification authorities are not small
entities and the burden on them is not relevant to this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on its analysis, and for the reasons stated above, the ASC
believes that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Therefore, the ASC certifies that
the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Determination
The ASC has analyzed the final rule under the factors in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1532). Under this
analysis, the ASC considered whether the final rule includes a Federal
mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year (adjusted annually for inflation). For
the following reasons, the ASC finds that the final rule does not
trigger the $100 million UMRA threshold. The costs specifically related
to requirements set forth in statute are excluded from expenditures
under the UMRA. Given that the final rule reflects requirements that
arise from section 1473 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the UMRA cost estimate
for the proposed rule is zero. For this reason, and for the other
reasons cited above, the ASC has determined that this final rule will
not result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, or
the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year.
Accordingly, this proposed rule is not subject to section 202 of the
UMRA.
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1102
Administrative practice and procedure, Appraisers, Banks, Banking,
Freedom of information, Mortgages, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority and Issuance
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the ASC amends 12 CFR
part 1102 as follows:
PART 1102--APPRAISER REGULATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 1102 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 3348(a), 3332, 3335, 3338 (a)(4)(B),
3348(c), 5 U.S.C. 552a, 553(e); Executive Order 12600, 52 FR 23781
(3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 235).
0
2. Subpart E to part 1102 is added to read as follows:
Subpart E--Collection and Transmission of Appraisal Management Company
(AMC) Registry Fees
Sec.
1102.400 Authority, purpose, and scope.
1102.401 Definitions.
1102.402 Establishing the annual AMC registry fee.
1102.403 Collection and transmission of annual AMC registry fees.
Subpart E--Collection and Transmission of Appraisal Management
Company (AMC) Registry Fees
Sec. 1102.400 Authority, purpose, and scope.
(a) Authority. This subpart is issued by the Appraisal Subcommittee
(ASC) under sections 1106 and 1109 (a)(4)(B) of Title XI of the
Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989
(Title XI), as amended by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) (Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat.
1376 (2010)), 12 U.S.C. 3335, 3338 (a)(4)(B)).
(b) Purpose. The purpose of this subpart is to implement section
1109 (a)(4)(B) of Title XI, 12 U.S.C. 3338.
(c) Scope. This subpart applies to States that elect to register
and supervise appraisal management companies pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 3346
and 3353, and the regulations promulgated thereunder.
Sec. 1102.401 Definitions.
For purposes of this subpart:
(a) AMC Registry means the national registry maintained by the ASC
of those AMCs that meet the Federal definition of AMC, as defined in 12
U.S.C. 3350(11), are registered by a State or are Federally regulated,
and have paid the annual AMC registry fee.
(b) AMC Rule means the interagency final rule on minimum
requirements for AMCs. (12 CFR 34.210-34.216; 12 CFR 225.190-225.196;
12 CFR 323.8-323.14; 12 CFR 1222.20-1222.26).
(c) ASC means the Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial
Institutions Examination Council established under section 1102 (12
U.S.C. 3310) as it amended the Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.) by adding
section 1011.
(d) Performed an appraisal means the appraisal service requested of
an appraiser by the AMC was provided to the AMC.
(e) State means any State, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, and American Samoa.
(f) Other terms. Definitions of: Appraisal management company
(AMC); appraisal management services; appraisal panel; consumer credit;
covered transaction; dwelling; Federally regulated AMC are incorporated
from the AMC Rule by reference.
Sec. 1102.402 Establishing the annual AMC registry fee.
The annual AMC registry fee to be applied by States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs is established as follows:
(a) In the case of an AMC that has been in existence for more than
a year, $25 multiplied by the number of appraisers who have performed
an appraisal for the AMC in connection with a covered transaction in
such State during the previous year; and
(b) In the case of an AMC that has not been in existence for more
than a year, $25 multiplied by the number of appraisers who have
performed an appraisal for the AMC in connection with a covered
transaction in such State since the AMC commenced doing business.
[[Page 44502]]
Sec. 1102.403 Collection and transmission of annual AMC registry
fees.
(a) Collection of annual AMC registry fees. States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs pursuant to the AMC Rule shall collect an
annual registry fee as established in Sec. 1102.402 from AMCs eligible
to be on the AMC Registry.
(b) Transmission of annual AMC registry fee. States that elect to
register and supervise AMCs pursuant to the AMC Rule shall transmit AMC
registry fees as established in Sec. 1102.402 to the ASC on an annual
basis. States may align a one-year period with any 12-month period,
which may, or may not, be based on the calendar year. Only those AMCs
whose registry fees have been transmitted to the ASC will be eligible
to be on the AMC Registry.
By the Appraisal Subcommittee.
Dated: September 13, 2017.
Arthur Lindo,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. 2017-20400 Filed 9-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6700-01-P