Activities and Operations of National Banks and Federal Savings Associations, 40794-40827 [2020-12435]
Download as PDF
40794
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency
12 CFR Parts 7, 145 and 160
[Docket ID OCC–2020–0003]
RIN 1557–AE74
Activities and Operations of National
Banks and Federal Savings
Associations
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Office of the Comptroller
of the Currency is issuing a notice of
proposed rulemaking to revise and
reorganize its regulations relating to the
activities and operations of national
banks and Federal savings associations.
This proposal would clarify and codify
recent OCC interpretations, integrate
certain regulations for national banks
and Federal savings associations, and
update or eliminate outdated regulatory
requirements that no longer reflect the
modern financial system.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 3, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Commenters are encouraged
to submit comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal or email, if possible.
Please use the title ‘‘Activities and
Operations of National Banks and
Federal Savings Associations’’ to
facilitate the organization and
distribution of the comments. You may
submit comments by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal—
Regulations.gov Classic or
Regulations.gov Beta Regulations.gov
Classic: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov/. Enter ‘‘Docket ID
OCC 2020–0003’’ in the Search Box and
click ‘‘Search.’’ Click on ‘‘Comment
Now’’ to submit public comments. For
help with submitting effective
comments please click on ‘‘View
Commenter’s Checklist.’’ Click on the
‘‘Help’’ tab on the Regulations.gov home
page to get information on using
Regulations.gov, including instructions
for submitting public comments.
Regulations.gov Beta: Go to https://
beta.regulations.gov/ or click ‘‘Visit
New Regulations.gov Site’’ from the
Regulations.gov classic homepage. Enter
‘‘Docket ID OCC–2020–0003’’ in the
Search Box and click ‘‘Search.’’ Public
comments can be submitted via the
‘‘Comment’’ box below the displayed
document information or click on the
document title and click the
‘‘Comment’’ box on the top-left side of
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
the screen. For help with submitting
effective comments please click on
‘‘Commenter’s Checklist.’’ For
assistance with the Regulations.gov Beta
site please call (877)–378–5457 (toll
free) or (703) 454–9859 Monday–Friday,
9 a.m.–5 p.m. ET or email to
regulations@erulemakinghelpdesk.com.
• Email: regs.comments@
occ.treas.gov.
• Mail: Chief Counsel’s Office,
Attention: Comment Processing, Office
of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400
7th Street SW, Suite 3E–218,
Washington, DC 20219.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th
Street SW, Suite 3E–218, Washington,
DC 20219.
• Fax: (571) 465–4326.
Instructions: You must include
‘‘OCC’’ as the agency name and ‘‘Docket
ID OCC–2020–0003’’ in your comment.
In general, the OCC will enter all
comments received into the docket and
publish the comments on the
Regulations.gov website without
change, including any business or
personal information provided such as
name and address information, email
addresses, or phone numbers.
Comments received, including
attachments and other supporting
materials, are part of the public record
and subject to public disclosure. Do not
include any information in your
comment or supporting materials that
you consider confidential or
inappropriate for public disclosure.
You may review comments and other
related materials that pertain to this
rulemaking action by any of the
following methods:
• Viewing Comments Electronically—
Regulations.gov Classic or
Regulations.gov Beta:Regulations.gov
Classic: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov/. Enter ‘‘Docket ID
OCC–2020–0003’’ in the Search box and
click ‘‘Search.’’ Click on ‘‘Open Docket
Folder’’ on the right side of the screen.
Comments and supporting materials can
be viewed and filtered by clicking on
‘‘View all documents and comments in
this docket’’ and then using the filtering
tools on the left side of the screen. Click
on the ‘‘Help’’ tab on the
Regulations.gov home page to get
information on using Regulations.gov.
The docket may be viewed after the
close of the comment period in the same
manner as during the comment period.
Regulations.gov Beta: Go to https://
beta.regulations.gov/ or click ‘‘Visit
New Regulations.gov Site’’ from the
Regulations.gov classic homepage. Enter
‘‘Docket ID OCC–2020–0003’’ in the
Search Box and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click on
the ‘‘Comments’’ tab. Comments can be
viewed and filtered by clicking on the
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
‘‘Sort By’’ drop-down on the right side
of the screen or the ‘‘Refine Results’’
options on the left side of the screen.
Supporting Materials can be viewed by
clicking on the ‘‘Documents’’ tab and
filtered by clicking on the ‘‘Sort By’’
drop-down on the right side of the
screen or the ‘‘Refine Results’’ options
on the left side of the screen.’’ For
assistance with the Regulations.gov Beta
site please call (877)–378–5457 (toll
free) or (703) 454–9859 Monday–Friday,
9 a.m.–5 p.m. ET or email to
regulations@erulemakinghelpdesk.com.
The docket may be viewed after the
close of the comment period in the same
manner as during the comment period.
Beth
Kirby, Assistant Director, Valerie Song,
Assistant Director, Heidi Thomas,
Special Counsel, or Chris Rafferty,
Attorney, Chief Counsel’s Office, (202)
649–5490, Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency, 400 7th Street SW,
Washington, DC 20219. For persons
who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY,
(202) 649–5597.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC) periodically reviews its
regulations to eliminate outdated or
otherwise unnecessary regulatory
provisions and, where possible, to
clarify or revise requirements imposed
on national banks and Federal savings
associations. These reviews are in
addition to the OCC’s decennial review
of its regulations as required by the
Economic Growth and Regulatory
Paperwork Reduction Act (EGRPRA).1
These reviews also consider, where
appropriate, opportunities to integrate
rules that apply to national banks with
similar rules that apply to Federal
savings associations in light of the
transfer to the OCC of all functions of
the former Office of Thrift Supervision
(OTS) relating to Federal savings
association by Title III of the Dodd1 Public Law 104–208 (1996), codified at 12
U.S.C. 3311(b). Section 2222 of EGRPRA requires
that, at least once every 10 years, the OCC along
with the other Federal banking agencies and the
Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council
(FFIEC) conduct a review of their regulations to
identify outdated or otherwise unnecessary
regulatory requirements imposed on insured
depository institutions. Specifically, EGRPRA
requires the agencies to categorize and publish their
regulations for comment, eliminate unnecessary
regulations to the extent that such action is
appropriate, and submit a report to Congress
summarizing their review. The agencies completed
their second EGRPRA review on March 2017 and
published their report in the Federal Register. 82
FR 15900 (March 30, 2017).
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act.2
As part of this process, the OCC is
proposing to revise and reorganize
subparts A through D of 12 CFR part 7,
Activities and Operations. Specifically,
the OCC is proposing new regulations or
updates to existing regulations to
address developing issues and industry
practices and to clarify OCC interpretive
positions. For example, proposed
revisions to subpart A include new
regulations covering tax equity finance
transactions, derivatives activities, and
payment system memberships.
Proposed revisions to subpart B address
corporate governance issues, such as
expanding the ability of national banks
to choose corporate governance
provisions under State or other law,
clarifying permissible anti-takeover
provisions, and adding provisions
relating to capital stock-related activities
of national banks. The OCC also is
proposing to update and integrate rules
relating to bank hours and closings in
subpart C and to update rules relating to
loan production and deposit production
offices and remote service units in
subpart D and move these sections to
subpart A to improve the organization of
part 7.3 As a companion to this
proposed rule, the OCC is separately
issuing an Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPR), published
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register as a separate document, that
requests comment on subpart E of 12
CFR part 7 and 12 CFR part 155, the
OCC’s rules on electronic banking
activities.
The OCC also is proposing more
general changes throughout part 7
including removing outdated or
superfluous regulations; consolidating
related regulations into one section; and
making various technical changes
throughout part 7. In addition, the OCC
is proposing to integrate a number of
rules in part 7 to include Federal
savings associations.
This proposed rule accompanies other
OCC efforts to modernize OCC rules,
remove unnecessary burden, and clarify
requirements, including the proposed
rule published in the Federal Register
on April 2, 2020, which would amend
requirements in 12 CFR part 5 for
national banks and Federal savings
2 Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010)
(transferring to the OCC all functions of the former
OTS relating to Federal savings associations).
3 The OCC has separately proposed a rule that
would amend 12 CFR 7.4001. See 84 FR 64229
(Nov. 21, 2019) (Permissible Interest on Loans That
Are Sold, Assigned, or Otherwise Transferred). The
OCC also has issued an interim final rule that
amends 12 CFR 7.1001 and 7.1003. See 85 FR 31943
(May 28, 2020) (Director, Shareholder, and Member
Meetings).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
associations that seek to engage in
certain corporate transactions or
activities.4
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
Subpart A—National Banks and Federal
Savings Association Powers
Activities That are Part of, or Incidental
to, the Business of Banking (New
§ 7.1000)
Section 7.5001 identifies the criteria
that the OCC uses to determine whether
an electronic activity is authorized for
national banks as part of, or incidental
to, the business of banking under 12
U.S.C. 24(Seventh) or other statutory
authority. While this section details
those criteria in the context of electronic
activities, the OCC uses these same
criteria to determine whether any
activity is part of, or incidental to, the
business of banking. To confirm the
broader applicability of the criteria
listed in § 7.5001, the OCC is proposing
to remove the word ‘‘electronic’’ from
this section and move § 7.5001 to
subpart A of part 7 as new § 7.1000. As
part of this move, the proposal would
redesignate current § 7.1000 as § 7.1024.
These proposed changes would better
organize OCC rules and clarify that the
criteria of this new § 7.1000 may apply
to any potential national bank activity
and not just those that are electronic in
nature. The OCC believes that new
§ 7.1000 belongs at the beginning of part
7 because it provides the framework for
all national bank powers that follow in
subpart A.
The OCC also proposes a technical
change to § 7.1000(c)(1). Specifically,
the proposed rule would amend this
provision to clarify that the four-factor
test set forth in this section to determine
activities authorized as part of the
business of banking applies to activities
not specifically included in 12 U.S.C.
24(Seventh) or other statutory authority.
Activities that are specifically included
in 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) or other
statutory authority are by express
statutory language within the business
of banking. This clarification reflects the
OCC’s long-standing use of the fourfactor test to determine whether an
activity not expressly included in a
statute is within the business of
banking.5
FR 18728.
Supreme Court has held that the business
of banking is not limited to the enumerated powers
listed in 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) but encompasses
more broadly activities that are part of or incidental
to the business of banking. NationsBank of N.C.,
N.A. v. Variable Annuity Life Ins. Co., 513 U.S. 251,
258–60 (1995).
PO 00000
4 85
5 The
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40795
National Bank Acting as Finder
(§ 7.1002)
The OCC is proposing a technical
change to its finder regulation at
§ 7.1002 and invites comment on the
inclusion of Federal savings association
finder activities in part 7. The OCC has
long permitted a national bank to act as
a finder to bring together buyers and
sellers of financial and nonfinancial
products and services.6 The OCC’s
regulations include two separate rules
relating to permissible national bank
finder activities. Section 7.1002, which
codifies OCC interpretive letters,
provides that finder activities are part of
the business of banking.7 This section
also describes permissible finder
activities; provides an illustrative, nonexclusive list of permissible finder
activities; clarifies that a national bank’s
finder authority does not allow it to
engage in brokerage activities that have
not been found to be permissible for
national banks; and authorizes a
national bank to advertise and accept
fees for finder services unless otherwise
prohibited by Federal law. Section
7.5002 provides that a national bank
generally may perform, provide, or
deliver through electronic means and
facilities any activity, function, product,
or service that is otherwise permissible.
Section 7.5002(a)(1) clarifies that a
national bank may act as electronic
finders and includes a list of
permissible electronic finder activities.8
The OCC is proposing to amend its
regulations by adding a new paragraph
(8) to § 7.1002(b) that would crossreference the permissible electronic
finder activities listed in § 7.5002(a)(1).
This change would reference all
examples of permissible finder activities
for national banks in one rule.
While finder activities are part of the
business of banking for a national bank,
a Federal savings association may
engage in a finder activity only to the
extent that the activity is incidental to
Federal savings association powers
authorized under the Home Owners’
Loan Act (HOLA) (12 U.S.C. 1461 et
seq).9 The former OTS determined that,
6 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 607 (Aug.
24, 1992).
7 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 824 (Feb.
27, 1998).
8 The OCC’s ANPR on National Bank and Federal
Savings Association Use of Digital Technology,
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register as a separate document, also requests
comment on whether to add more examples to the
electronic finder activities list in 12 CFR
7.5002(a)(1).
9 The OCC and the predecessor agencies
previously responsible for the supervision of
Federal savings associations ‘‘have long recognized
that federal savings associations possess ‘incidental’
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
Continued
07JYP2
40796
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
if certain factors are met, a Federal
savings association may collect fees for
referring customers to third parties 10
and may provide services and products
to customers through a third-party
discount program 11 as activities
incidental to their statutorily
enumerated powers. The OCC also has
recognized Federal savings association
finder authority in its Retail Nondeposit
Investment Products Booklet of the
Comptroller’s Handbook.12
The OCC invites comment on whether
it should add a separate provision to
§ 7.1002 to set forth Federal savings
association finder authority. This
provision could provide that a Federal
savings association may engage in finder
activities to the extent that those
activities are incidental to Federal
savings association powers expressly
authorized under the HOLA. The OCC
also could include in this provision a
list of Federal savings association finder
activities that the former OTS or the
OCC have determined are permissible.
This list could codify prior
interpretations and include collecting
fees for referring customers to third
parties and providing services and
products to customers through a thirdparty discount program. The OCC
specifically requests comment on what
other Federal savings association finder
activities the OCC could add to this list.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Money Lent by a National Bank at
Banking Offices or at Facilities Other
Than Banking Offices (§ 7.1003)
Twelve U.S.C. 81 provides that a
national bank must transact business in
the place specified in its organization
certificate and in any branches
established or maintained in accordance
with 12 U.S.C. 36. The OCC interprets
12 U.S.C. 81 to mean that money is
deemed to be lent at a bank’s main
office unless there is a sufficient nexus
tying the transaction to another location,
in which case that location must be
licensed as a branch office.
Twelve U.S.C. 36 and 12 CFR 5.30
define ‘‘branch’’ as a place of business
established by the national bank where
‘‘deposits are received, or checks paid,
or money lent.’’ Section 7.1003 provides
that for purposes of what constitutes a
branch within the meaning of 12 U.S.C.
36 and 12 CFR 5.30, ‘‘money’’ is deemed
to be ‘‘lent’’ only at the place, if any,
powers, i.e., powers that are incident to the express
powers of federal savings associations as set forth
in the Home Owners’ Loan Act.’’ OTS Op. Acting
Ch. Couns. at 3 (Mar. 25, 1994).
10 OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (May 5, 2000).
11 OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (Aug. 5, 2008).
12 OCC, Comptroller’s Handbook: Retail
Nondeposit Investment Products Booklet at 9 (Jan.
2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
where the borrower in-person receives
loan proceeds directly from bank funds
either: (1) From the lending bank or its
operating subsidiary or (2) at a facility
that is established by the lending bank
or its operating subsidiary. Section
7.1003(b) further provides that a
borrower may receive loan proceeds
directly from bank funds in person at a
place that is not the bank’s main office
and is not licensed as a branch without
violating 12 U.S.C. 36, 12 U.S.C. 81, and
12 CFR 5.30, provided that a third party
is used to deliver the funds and the
place is not established by the lending
bank or its operating subsidiary. This
paragraph defines a third party to
include a person who satisfies the
requirements of § 7.1012(c)(2) or one
who customarily delivers loan proceeds
directly from bank funds under
accepted industry practice, such as an
attorney or escrow agent at a real estate
closing.
The OCC is proposing to amend
§ 7.1003 to incorporate an OCC
interpretation that further clarifies when
the OCC considers money to be lent at
a location other than the main office.
Specifically, proposed paragraph (c)
would provide that a national bank
operating subsidiary may distribute loan
proceeds from its own funds or bank
funds directly to the borrower in person
at offices the operating subsidiary
established without violating 12 U.S.C.
36, 12 U.S.C. 81, and 12 CFR 5.30 if the
operating subsidiary provides similar
services on substantially similar terms
and conditions to customers of
unaffiliated entities, including
unaffiliated banks.13 Based on Supreme
Court precedent,14 OCC interpretations
have recognized that a facility must
provide a convenience to bank
customers that gives the bank a
competitive advantage in obtaining
customers for the facility to be
considered a branch for purposes of 12
U.S.C. 36 and 12 CFR 5.30.15 The OCC
has found that a facility where members
of the public, customers, and
noncustomers alike receive substantially
similar services on substantially similar
terms is not a facility created to attract
bank customers and thus the
establishment of this type of facility
offers no competitive advantage to the
Interpretive Letter No. 814 (Nov. 3, 1997).
First National Bank in Plant City v.
Dickinson, the Supreme Court explained that
because the purpose of 12 U.S.C. 36 is to maintain
competitive equality, it is relevant in construing the
term ‘‘branch’’ to consider whether the facility gives
the bank an advantage in its competition for
customers. First National Bank in Plant City v.
Dickinson, 396 U.S. 122, 136–137 (1969).
15 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 635 (July 23,
1993). See also 61 FR 60342, 60347 (Nov. 27, 1996).
PO 00000
13 See
14 In
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
national bank.16 Proposed paragraph (c)
reflects this OCC precedent.
Establishment of a Loan Production
Office by a National Bank (§ 7.1004)
Credit Decisions at Other Than Banking
Offices of a National Bank (§ 7.1005)
Section 7.1004 provides that a
national bank may use the services of
persons not employed by the bank for
originating loans. It also provides that
an employee or agent of a national bank
or its subsidiary may originate a loan at
a site other than the main office or a
branch office of the bank without
violating the branching and place of
business requirements of 12 U.S.C. 36
and 12 U.S.C. 81 if the loan is approved
and made at the main office or a branch
office of the bank or at an office of an
operating subsidiary located on the
premises of, or contiguous to, the main
office or branch office of the bank.
Section 7.1005 provides that a national
bank and its operating subsidiary may
make a credit decision regarding a loan
application at a site other than the main
office or a branch office of the bank
provided that ‘‘money’’ is not ‘‘lent’’ at
those other sites within the meaning of
§ 7.1003.
OCC precedent has explained that the
purpose of § 7.1004 is not to prescribe
where certain activities must be
performed but rather to help avoid
violations of the branching laws by
defining a ‘‘safe harbor’’ of loan
origination activities that will not
constitute branching.17 Further, the
OCC has stated that this section does
not purport to address the outer limits
of what is permissible nor establish any
affirmative requirement for where loan
production office (LPO)-originated loans
must be approved or made.18 The OCC
has found that § 7.1004 should not be
read to require loans originated at LPOs
to be approved and made at a main or
branch office, and that it is permissible
for loans originated at an LPO to be
approved at separate back office
facilities not located on the premises of,
or contiguous to, a main or branch office
of the bank.19 These OCC
interpretations were codified in
§ 7.1005. When the OCC adopted
§ 7.1005, the agency noted that it was
retaining § 7.1004 despite the potential
tension between the two sections
because § 7.1004 is a judicially
recognized safe harbor permitting
national banks to undertake certain
16 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 814 (Nov. 3,
1997).
17 OCC Interpretive Letter No. 634 (July 23, 1993).
18 Id.; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 667 (Oct. 12,
1994).
19 OCC Interpretive Letter No. 667 (Oct. 12, 1994).
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
lending related activities without
violating branching statutes, and that it
did not view a lending related activity
that falls outside the scope of § 7.1004,
as with § 7.1005 regarding the making of
credit decisions, as necessarily violating
branching statutes.20
The OCC is proposing to amend
§ 7.1004 so that it reflects the broader
permissibility provided by current
§ 7.1005, to describe the permitted
activities as ‘‘loan production
activities,’’ and to remove § 7.1005 to
simplify and streamline its rules. As
proposed, paragraph (a) of § 7.1004
would provide that a national bank or
its operating subsidiary may engage in
loan production activities at a site other
than the main office or a branch office
of the bank. The proposal would permit
a national bank or its operating
subsidiary to solicit loan customers,
market loan products, assist persons in
completing application forms and
related documents to obtain a loan,
originate and approve loans, make
credit decisions regarding a loan
application, and offer other lendingrelated services such as loan
information and applications at a loan
production office without violating 12
U.S.C. 36 and 12 U.S.C. 81, provided
that ‘‘money’’ is not deemed to be ‘‘lent’’
at that site within the meaning of
§ 7.1003 and the site does not accept
deposits or pay withdrawals. This
description of activities is not intended
to alter the description of ‘‘money lent’’
in § 7.1003 nor affect the scope of
activities that are permissible for a
national bank to perform at a nonbranch location. Rather, the OCC is
proposing this description to provide
greater clarity to what activities a
national bank may conduct at a loan
production office. As a technical
change, the OCC would redesignate
former paragraph (a) as paragraph (b)
and amend it to reference loan
production activities instead of
originating loans.
Loan Agreement Providing for a
National Bank Share In Profits, Income,
or Earnings or for Stock Warrants
(§ 7.1006)
The OCC is proposing to amend
§ 7.1006 to include Federal savings
associations. Section 7.1006 permits a
national bank to take as consideration
for a loan: (1) A share in the profit,
income, or earnings from a business
enterprise of a borrower or (2) a stock
warrant issued by the business
enterprise of a borrower provided the
bank does not exercise the warrant. This
arrangement is known as an ‘‘equity
20 61
FR 4849, 4851 (Feb. 9, 1996).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:54 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
kicker.’’ Section 7.1006 further provides
that the national bank may take the
share or stock warrant in addition to, or
in lieu of, interest. However, the
national bank may not condition the
borrower’s ability to repay principal on
the value of the profit, income, earnings
of the business enterprise or upon the
value of the warrant received.
The former OTS and its predecessor,
the Federal Home Loan Bank Board,
permitted a Federal savings association
to take a share of profit, income, or
earnings as consideration for a loan as
not inconsistent with Federal savings
association lending authority under
HOLA 21 to maintain parity with the
commercial lending practices of
national banks.22 In addition, the former
OTS permitted a Federal savings
association to acquire warrants as an
incidental power of its authority to
make secured loans for commercial,
corporate, or business purposes under
HOLA and applied the same restrictions
on exercising those warrants as applied
to national banks.23 By amending
§ 7.1006 to include Federal savings
associations, the proposed rule would
codify these interpretations to clarify
this authority and to better provide
parity with national banks.
National Bank Holding Collateral Stock
as Nominee (§ 7.1009)
Current § 7.1009 permits a national
bank to transfer stock it has received as
collateral for a loan into the bank’s
name as nominee.24 The OCC believes
this provision is unnecessary and is
proposing to delete it. The OCC permits
a bank to perfect its security interests in
collateral under applicable State laws
consistent with the Uniform
Commercial Code.25 In situations where
a bank holds stock as collateral,
typically one method to perfect that
interest under State law is to list the
bank as nominee on the stock certificate.
However, recent versions of the Uniform
Commercial Code 26 provide other
potentially less burdensome methods to
perfect an interest in securities
collateral, for example, by obtaining
control over a brokerage account
holding the stock. Therefore, the OCC
believes that § 7.1009 is not necessary.
Removing this provision would
U.S.C. 1464(c)(2).
letter from Jordan Luke, Gen.
Couns., Federal Home Loan Bank Board (Dec. 19,
1988), available on Westlaw: 1988 WL 1022319
(O.T.S.).
23 Id.
24 See 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh).
25 See OCC, Comptroller’s Handbook: Asset-Based
Lending at 21–22 (2017).
26 Primarily Articles 8 and 9, which have been
substantively adopted by all U.S. jurisdictions. See
https://www.uniformlaws.org/acts/ucc.
PO 00000
21 12
22 Unpublished
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40797
streamline OCC regulations while not
substantively changing the methods
national banks may use to perfect their
interests in stock or other securities
obtained as collateral for loans, which
continue to include being listed as
nominee if permitted under State law.
Postal Services by National Banks and
Federal Savings Associations (§ 7.1010)
Section 7.1010 provides that a
national bank may operate a postal
substation on banking premises and
receive income from it. It describes the
types of services permitted and states
that a bank may advertise them to attract
customers to the bank. It also requires
the bank to operate the substation in
accordance with the rules and
regulations of the United States Postal
Service (USPS) and to keep books and
records on it, which are subject to
inspection by the USPS, separate from
those of other banking operations.
The OCC is proposing to amend
§ 7.1010 to also apply to Federal savings
associations, consistent with the
position taken in agency guidance.27
The OCC also proposes to replace the
words ‘‘operate a postal substation’’
with ‘‘provide postal services’’ because
the term ‘‘Postal substation’’ is no longer
used in USPS regulations. This change
in terminology would clarify that
national banks and Federal savings
associations may offer a limited menu of
postal services and are not required to
operate full-service post offices.
National Bank Receipt of Stock From a
Small Business Investment Company
(§ 7.1015)
Fifteen U.S.C. 682(b)(1) permits a
national bank to invest in one or more
small business investment companies
(SBICs) or in any entity established
solely to invest in SBICs, provided that
the total amount of all SBIC investments
does not exceed five percent of the
bank’s capital and surplus.28 Section
7.1015 provides that a national bank
may purchase stock of a SBIC and
receive benefits of such stock
ownership. This section further
provides that the receipt and retention
of a dividend from a SBIC in the form
of stock of a corporate borrower of the
SBIC is not a purchase of stock within
the meaning of 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh).
The OCC is proposing to amend
§ 7.1015 to provide that a national bank
27 The former OTS previously concluded that
Federal savings associations are authorized to
operate a postal substation on premises. See OTS
Op. Acting Ch. Couns., Mar. 25, 1994.
28 National banks also may invest in SBICs
pursuant to their community development
investment authority See 12 U.S.C. 24(Eleventh)
and 12 CFR part 24.
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
40798
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
may invest in a SBIC or in any entity
established solely to invest in SBICs,
and that purchasing stock in a SBIC is
one example of this type of investment.
This amendment would more closely
align § 7.1015 to 15 U.S.C. 682(b). In
addition, the OCC is proposing to
amend § 7.1015 to provide that a
national bank’s SBIC investments are
subject to appropriate capital
limitations.
Fifteen U.S.C. 682(b)(2) provides a
Federal savings association with similar
authority to invest in SBICs.29 This
authority is codified in OCC regulations
at 12 CFR 160.30. To clarify this
authority, the OCC is proposing to add
a reference to Federal savings
association SBIC authority in § 7.1015
and cross-reference to 12 CFR 160.30.
The OCC also is proposing to amend
§ 7.1015 to clarify that a national bank
or Federal savings association may
invest in a SBIC that is either (1) already
organized and has obtained a license
from the Small Business
Administration, or (2) in the process of
being organized. The OCC has
previously interpreted this authority to
permit a national bank to invest in a
SBIC that is in the process of being
organized.30
Letters of Credit and Independent
Undertakings (§ 7.1016)
The OCC proposes to amend 12 CFR
7.1016, which provides that a national
bank may issue letters of credit and
other independent undertakings to
customers, to include Federal savings
associations. Section 7.1016 provides
that a national bank entering into an
independent undertaking should not
expose itself to undue risk and also
outlines certain safety and soundness
considerations for these activities.
Specifically, § 7.1016 provides that a
national bank should consider at a
minimum: (1) Whether the terms make
clear the independence of the
undertaking; (2) whether the amount of
the undertaking is limited; (3) whether
the undertaking is limited in duration
or, if not, whether the bank has an
ability to end the undertaking or
demand cash collateral from the
applicant; and (4) whether the
undertaking will be collateralized or
include a reimbursement right. Section
7.1016 also provides that certain
undertakings require particular
29 As with national banks, Federal savings
associations also may invest in SBICs pursuant to
their community development investment
authority. See 12 U.S.C. 1464(c)(4)(B) and 12 CFR
5.59 (Service corporations of Federal savings
associations).
30 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 832 (June 18,
1998).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
protections against credit, operational,
and market risk and outlines the
protections a bank should or must take
in specific circumstances.31 Section
7.1016 further provides that the national
bank should possess operational
expertise that is commensurate with the
sophistication of its independent
undertaking activities. Finally, § 7.1016
requires a bank to accurately reflect its
undertakings in its records.
Pursuant to § 160.50, a Federal
savings association may issue letters of
credit and may issue other independent
undertakings as are approved by the
OCC, subject to the restrictions in
§ 160.120. Section 160.120 contains
provisions that are largely similar to the
provisions applicable to national banks
in § 7.1016.32 However, §§ 160.50 and
160.120 provide that, unless it is a letter
of credit, a Federal savings association
only may issue independent
undertakings that have been approved
by the OCC. The OTS explained when
it updated its regulation that Federal
savings associations were not
traditionally involved in international
banking transactions, which utilized
these independent undertakings, as
were national banks.33 The OTS stated
that the approval requirement provided
‘‘the appropriate balance between giving
thrifts greater flexibility to potentially
engage in new types of transactions
while at the same time ensuring that
thrifts have properly evaluated the risks
posed by a particular transaction
consistent with prudent banking
practice.’’ 34
The OCC is proposing to amend
§ 7.1016 to apply it to Federal savings
associations, and to remove §§ 160.50
and 160.120, because of the similarities
between the national bank and Federal
savings association independent
undertaking regulations. As a result, a
Federal savings association would no
longer be limited to issuing non-letter of
credit independent undertakings
approved by the OCC. The industry’s
rules of practice have improved since
the former OTS promulgated the
regulation in 1996. In addition, the
31 Specifically, § 7.1016(b)(2) provides that: (1) If
the undertaking is to honor by delivery of an item
of value other than money, the bank should ensure
that market fluctuations affecting the value of the
item will not cause the bank to assume undue
market risk; (2) if the undertaking provides for
automatic renewal, the terms for renewal should be
consistent with the bank’s ability to make any
necessary credit assessments prior to renewal; and
(3) if a bank issues an undertaking for its own
account, the underlying transaction for which it is
issued must be within the bank’s authority and
must comply with any safety and soundness
requirements applicable to that transaction.
32 See 61 FR 50951, 50958 (Sept. 30, 1996).
33 Id.
34 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
operations of Federal savings
associations have evolved over the past
two decades and those Federal savings
associations that issue independent
undertakings are familiar with nonletters of credit independent
undertakings and related supervisory
expectations. Furthermore, the OCC
expects national banks and Federal
savings associations to have operational
expertise commensurate with the
sophistication of its letters of credit or
independent undertaking activities.35
The OCC believes that this expectation
is sufficient to ensure that all OCCsupervised institutions properly
evaluate the risks associated with these
activities. For these reasons, the OCC
finds that the OCC approval
requirement for non-letter of credit
independent undertakings issued by
Federal savings associations is no longer
necessary.
The OCC also is proposing to clarify
that Federal branches and agencies of
foreign banks may issue letters of credit
and other independent undertakings,
consistent with the conditions outlined
in § 7.1016.36 Finally, the OCC is
proposing technical changes to the
footnote to reflect updates to the laws
and rules of practice cited.
National Bank Participation in Financial
Literacy Programs (§ 7.1021)
Twelve CFR 7.1021 provides that a
national bank may participate in a
financial literacy program on the
premises of, or at a facility used by, a
school. Section 7.1021 also provides
that the school premises or facility will
not be considered a branch of the bank
if: (1) The bank does not establish and
operate the school premises or facility
on which the financial literacy program
is conducted; and (2) the principal
purposes of the program is educational.
The OCC is proposing to amend
§ 7.1021 to clarify that the purpose of
this section is whether the facilities or
premises used for such a program would
be considered a branch of the national
bank under 12 U.S.C. 36. Facilities or
premises are only considered to be
branches of a national bank if they are
established and operated by the national
bank. The proposal also would provide
that the OCC considers the
establishment and operation in this
35 12
CFR 7.1016(b)(3) and 12 CFR 160.120(b)(3).
4(b) of the International Banking Act,
12 U.S.C. 3102(b) (Pub. L. 95–369) provides that the
operations of a foreign bank at a Federal branch or
agency shall be conducted with the same rights and
privileges as a national bank at the same location
and shall be subject to all the same duties,
restrictions, penalties, liabilities, conditions, and
limitations that would apply under the National
Bank Act to a national bank doing business at the
same location. See also 12 CFR 28.13.
36 Section
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
context on a case by case basis,
considering the facts and circumstances.
However, the OCC has previously
determined 37 that whether a financial
literacy program is a branch under
section 36 may be evaluated under the
safe harbor test for messenger services
established by third parties set forth in
§ 7.1012(c)(2) and that a premises or
facility used for a school savings
program is clearly established by a third
party if it meets this safe harbor test.
The proposal would codify this
interpretation by providing that a
premises is not a branch of the national
bank if the safe harbor test in
§ 7.1012(c)(2) applicable to messenger
services established by third parties is
satisfied and that the factor discussed in
§ 7.1012(c)(2)(i), regarding whether the
bank employs the person who provide
the service, can be met if bank employee
participation in the financial literacy
program consists of managing the
program or conducting or engaging in
financial education activities provided
the school or other community
organization retains control over the
program and over the premises or
facilities at which the program is held.
The OCC believes that this should
provide clarity with respect to the
meaning of ‘‘establish and operate’’ in
§ 7.1021.
Consistent with current practice, the
OCC also is expanding the scope of
financial literacy programs beyond
schools to encompass other communitybased organizations, such as non-profit
organizations, that provide financial
literacy programs. In addition, the OCC
is moving the definition of financial
literacy program to the beginning of the
section to clarify that, while a financial
literacy program is a program for which
the primary purpose is educational, this
is not a factor in determining whether
the premises or facility is a branch for
purposes of section 36.
The OCC is not adding Federal
savings associations to this section
because they are not subject to the
branching requirements in section 36.
However, the OCC notes that
participation in financial literacy
programs is a permissible activity for
both national banks and Federal savings
associations.
37 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 839 (August 3,
1998).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
National Banks’ Authority To Buy and
Sell Exchange, Coin, And Bullion
(§ 7.1022)
Federal Savings Associations,
Prohibition on Industrial or Commercial
Metal Dealing or Investing (§ 7.1023)
The OCC also is proposing a technical
change to §§ 7.1022 and 7.1023. Section
7.1022 prohibits a national bank from
acquiring or selling industrial or
commercial metal for purposes of
dealing or investing. Section 7.1022
excludes industrial and commercial
metals from the national bank authority
to ‘‘buy and sell exchange, coin, and
bullion.’’ Section 7.1023 similarly
prohibits a Federal savings association
from dealing or investing in industrial
or commercial metal. Both sections
require a national bank and a Federal
savings association to dispose of any
industrial or commercial metal held as
a result of dealing or investing in that
metal as soon as practicable, but not
later than one year from the effective
date of the regulation. The OCC may
grant up to four separate one-year
extensions if the bank makes a good
faith effort to dispose of the metal and
the retention of the metal for an
additional year is not inconsistent with
the safe and sound operation of the
bank. The OCC is proposing a technical
change to both sections to replace the
words ‘‘one year from the effective date
of this regulation’’ with the actual
effective date of that final rule, April 1,
2018.
Tax Equity Finance Transactions (New
§ 7.1025)
The OCC and the courts have long
held that a national bank may use its 12
U.S.C. 24(Seventh) lending authority to
engage in transactions that do not take
the form of a traditional loan to
accommodate the demands of the
market, provided the transaction is the
functional equivalent of a loan.38 The
OCC has interpreted this authority to
permit a national bank to engage in tax
equity finance (TEF) transactions.39
Although the OCC has not previously
addressed the permissibility of TEF
transactions for a Federal savings
association, OCC regulations authorize a
Federal savings association to engage in
loan equivalent transactions pursuant to
12 U.S.C. 1464,40 and the former OTS
permitted a Federal savings association
to participate in certain transactions in
order to receive tax credits and other tax
benefits.41 The OCC is proposing to
codify and clarify these interpretations
of 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) and 1464 in
new § 7.1025.42
Proposed § 7.1025(a) would permit a
national bank and Federal savings
association to engage in a TEF
transaction pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
24(Seventh) and 1464 if the transaction
is the functional equivalent of a loan, as
provided in proposed paragraph (c), and
if a TEF transaction satisfies the
requirements of proposed paragraph (d).
Proposed § 7.1025(b) would define a
‘‘tax equity finance transaction’’ as a
transaction in which a national bank or
Federal savings association provides
equity financing to fund a project that
generates tax credits and other tax
benefits and the use of an equity-based
structure allows the transfer of those
credits to the bank or savings
association. Paragraph (b) also would
define ‘‘capital and surplus’’ by crossreferencing to its definition in the OCC’s
lending limit rule, 12 CFR 32.43 As
defined in the lending limit rule, for
qualifying community banking
organizations that have elected to use
the community bank leverage ratio
framework, as set forth under the OCC’s
Capital Adequacy Standards at 12 CFR
part 3, ‘‘capital and surplus’’ means a
qualifying community banking
organization’s tier 1 capital, as used
under 12 CFR 3.12, plus a qualifying
community banking organization’s
allowance for loan and lease losses or
adjusted allowances for credit losses, as
applicable, as reported in the
Consolidated Reports of Condition and
Income (Call Report). For all other
national banks and Federal savings
associations, ‘‘capital and surplus’’
means a national bank’s or savings
association’s tier 1 and tier 2 capital,
calculated under the risk-based capital
standards applicable to the institution
as reported in the Call Report, plus the
40 12
CFR 160.41 (Leasing).
e.g., OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (Feb. 9, 2004)
(New Market Tax Credit Program) and OTS Op. Ch.
Couns. (Nov. 10, 1994) (low-income housing tax
credit partnership).
42 A national bank or Federal savings association
may be able to participate in TEF transactions
under an alternative authority, including
community development and public welfare
investment authority under 12 U.S.C. 24(Eleventh)
and 12 CFR 24.
43 The OCC recently amended the definition of
‘‘capital and surplus’’ in 12 CFR 32.2 in its recent
community bank leverage ratio rule. See 84 FR
61776 (November 13, 2019).
41 See,
38 See M & M Leasing Corp. v. Seattle First Nat’l
Bank, 563 F.2d 1377 (9th Cir. 1977), cert. denied,
436 U.S. 956 (1978). See also OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 1048 (Dec. 21, 2005); Corporate Decision
99–07 (March 26, 1999); Corporate Decision 98–17
(March 27, 1998); Interpretive Letter No. 867 (June
1, 1999).
39 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1048 (Dec. 21,
2005), OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1139 (Nov. 13,
2013), OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1141 (Apr. 22,
2014). See also 26 U.S.C. 48 (energy ITC) and 26
U.S.C. 45 (energy PTC). Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) rules govern tax credit availability.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40799
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
40800
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
balance of a national bank’s or Federal
savings association’s allowance for loan
and lease losses or adjusted allowances
for credit losses, as applicable, not
included in the bank’s or savings
association’s tier 2 capital, for purposes
of the calculation of risk-based capital,
as reported in the national bank’s or
savings association’s Call Report.
Under proposed paragraph (c), a TEF
transaction would qualify as the
functional equivalent of a loan if it
meets eight requirements that derive
from OCC interpretations. First, the TEF
transaction structure must be necessary
for making the tax credits and other tax
benefits available to the national bank or
Federal savings association. The OCC
requests comment on whether national
banks or Federal savings associations
routinely obtain legal opinions
regarding the availability of tax credits
in connection with these types of
finance transactions.
Second, the TEF transaction must be
of limited tenure and not indefinite.
Under this requirement, a national bank
or Federal savings association would
need to be able to achieve its targeted
return in a reasonable time, and the TEF
transaction would need to have a
defined termination point. A national
bank or Federal savings association
could satisfy this requirement if the TEF
transaction will terminate within a
reasonable time of the transaction’s
initiation or if a project sponsor has an
option to purchase a national bank’s or
Federal savings association’s interest at
or near fair market value. The national
bank or Federal savings association
cannot control whether it retains the
interest indefinitely. The proposed rule
would permit a national bank or Federal
savings association to retain a limited
investment interest if that interest is
required by law to obtain continuing tax
benefits from the TEF transaction.
Third, the tax benefits and other
payments received by the national bank
or Federal savings association from the
TEF transaction must repay the
investment and provide an implied rate
of return. As a result of this proposed
requirement, the national bank’s or
Federal savings association’s
underwriting could not place undue
reliance on the value of any residual
stake in the project and the proceeds of
disposition following the expiration of
the tax credits’ compliance period.
Fourth, the national bank or Federal
savings association must not rely on
appreciation of value in the project or
property rights underlying the project
for repayment. As discussed in OCC
Interpretive Letter 1139, wind turbines,
solar panels, and other ancillary
equipment are not considered real
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
property under 12 U.S.C. 29, and
acquisition of interests in real estate
incidental to the provision of financing
is not inconsistent with 12 U.S.C. 29.
Fifth, the national bank or Federal
savings association must use
underwriting and credit approval
criteria and standards that are
substantially equivalent to the
underwriting and credit approval
criteria and standards used for a
traditional commercial loan. To comply
with this requirement, the documents
governing the TEF transaction should
contain terms and conditions equivalent
to those found in documents governing
typical lending relationships and
transactions.
Sixth, the national bank or Federal
savings association must be a passive
investor in the transaction and must be
unable to direct the affairs of the project
company. This means that the national
bank or Federal savings association
would not be able to direct day-to-day
operations of the project. However, the
OCC would not consider temporary
management activities in the context of
foreclosure or similar proceedings as
violating this requirement.
Seventh, the national bank or Federal
savings association must appropriately
account for the transaction initially and
on an ongoing basis and document
contemporaneously its accounting
assessment and conclusion. Although
TEF transactions can be the functional
equivalent of loans pursuant to a
national bank’s or Federal savings
association’s lending authority, the
accounting treatment of tax equity
investments may differ from being a
loan.
Proposed paragraph (d) would
provide that a national bank or Federal
savings association only could engage in
TEF transactions if it meets the
following four additional requirements.
First, the national bank or Federal
savings association cannot control the
sale of energy, if any, from the project.
To satisfy this requirement, a national
bank or Federal savings association
could enter into a long-term contract
with creditworthy counterparties to sell
energy from the project, as articulated in
OCC Interpretive Letter 1139, or have
the project sponsor bear responsibility
for selling generated power into the
energy market so long as those sales are
stabilized by a hedge contract that
provides reasonable price and cash flow
certainty, as articulated in OCC
Interpretive Letter 1141.
Second, the national bank or Federal
savings association must limit the total
dollar amount of TEF transactions to no
more than five percent of its capital and
surplus unless the OCC determines, by
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
written approval of a written request by
the national bank or Federal savings
association to exceed the five percent
limit, that a higher aggregate limit will
not pose an unreasonable risk to the
national bank or Federal savings
association and that the tax equity
finance transactions in the national
bank’s or Federal savings association’s
portfolio will not be conducted in an
unsafe or unsound manner. In no case
may a bank’s or FSA’s total dollar
amount of TEF transactions exceed
fifteen percent of its capital and surplus.
As provided for public welfare
investments under 12 U.S.C.
24(Eleventh) and 12 CFR 24, a national
bank is generally subject to a five
percent aggregate investment limit and
this limit encourages a national bank to
maintain appropriate risk
diversification.44 The OCC specifically
requests comment on whether the OCC
should use an alternate measure when
calculating the aggregate investment
limit and whether the proposed five
percent aggregate investment limit is
appropriate.
Third, the national bank or Federal
savings association has provided written
notification to the OCC prior to engaging
in each TEF transaction that includes its
evaluation of the risks posed by the
transaction.
Fourth, the national bank or Federal
savings association can identify,
measure, monitor, and control the
associated risks of its tax equity finance
transaction activities individually and
as a whole on an ongoing basis to ensure
that it conducts such activities in a safe
and sound manner.
Proposed paragraph (e) would provide
that the TEF transaction must be subject
to the substantive legal requirements of
a loan, including the lending limits
prescribed by 12 U.S.C. 84, as
implemented by 12 CFR 32, and, if the
active investor or project sponsor of the
transaction is an affiliate of the national
bank or Federal savings association, the
restrictions on transactions with
affiliates prescribed by 12 U.S.C. 371c
and 371c–1, as implemented by 12 CFR
223. If a national bank or Federal
savings association is relying on its
lending authority to participate in a TEF
transaction, the TEF transaction would
be subject to regulatory requirements
applicable to loans, including any
applicable legal lending limits and
affiliate transaction restrictions to the
extent applicable. However, the
regulatory capital treatment of a
national bank or Federal savings
association’s participation in a TEF
transaction would be determined
44 12
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
U.S.C. 24(Eleventh); 12 CFR 24.4(a).
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
according to the regulatory capital rule
(12 CFR part 3).
The OCC specifically requests
comment on whether the final rule
should prohibit a national bank or
Federal savings association from
entering into TEF transactions for
projects involving residential
installation TEF transactions not
involving utility-scale standalone
power-generation facilities. The OCC
also requests comment on whether the
final rule should permit national banks
or Federal savings associations to invest
in TEF transactions involving detached
single-family residences, multi-family
residences, or non-utility commercial
buildings. Further, the OCC requests
comment on whether national banks
and Federal savings associations should
have other contractual remedies
available before entering into a TEF
transaction. For example, should the
final rule require national banks or
Federal savings associations to have the
option to replace the sponsor or
manager of a project under certain
conditions or be required to have
indemnifications for breaches of tax
representations or other legal risks? In
the alternative, should a final rule
require a project sponsor or the
sponsor’s parent to make or guarantee
such an indemnification? The OCC also
requests comment on whether national
banks and Federal savings associations
are currently participating in TEF
transactions through fund-based
structures, and, if not, whether national
banks and Federal savings associations
want to participate in TEF transactions
through fund-based structures. Further,
the OCC requests comment on whether
there are additional issues related to
fund-based structures and whether the
final rule should include additional
safeguards related to fund-based
structures.
Payment System Memberships (New
§ 7.1026)
Section 7.1026 Payment System
Memberships. The OCC has long
recognized the authority of national
banks to become members of payment
systems.45 Similarly, OTS precedent
permits Federal savings associations to
join payment systems.46 In 2014, the
OCC published a legal interpretive letter
clarifying that national banks may join
payment systems with approval from
the OCC even when the national bank
would be exposed to potentially open45 See, e.g., OCC Conditional Approval Letter No.
220 (Dec. 2, 1996); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 993
(May 16, 1997).
46 See, e.g., 12 CFR 145.17; OTS Op. Ch. Couns.
(Sept. 15, 1995); OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (Dec. 22,
1995).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
ended liability as a member of the
payment system.47 This interpretive
letter also outlined the approval process
for this membership. In a subsequent
interpretive letter, the OCC modified the
process to remove the approval
requirement.48 To provide additional
clarity to national banks, the OCC is
proposing to add a new § 7.1026 to part
7 that would codify the current process
for joining a payment system. The OCC
also is proposing to apply this section
to Federal savings associations to
provide equal treatment to Federal
savings associations. The OCC
continues to support national banks and
Federal savings associations performing
their critical roles in payment systems—
including as members and architects.
The proposal reminds national banks
and Federal savings associations of their
responsibility for ensuring that payment
system membership is conducted in a
safe and sound manner.
Definitions. Proposed § 7.1026(a)
would provide definitions for several
terms used throughout the proposed
new section. First, the proposal would
define ‘‘appropriate OCC supervisory
office’’ as the OCC office that is
responsible for the supervision of a
national bank or Federal savings
association, as described in subpart A of
12 CFR part 4.
Second, because different payment
systems may use different terminology,
the OCC is proposing to define
‘‘member’’ to include a national bank or
Federal savings association designated
as a ‘‘member,’’ a ‘‘participant,’’ or other
similar role by a payment system,
including by a payment system that
requires the national bank or Federal
savings association to share in
operational losses or maintain reserves
with the payment system to offset
potential liability for operational losses.
The OCC requests comment on whether
the definition of ‘‘member’’ should
include national banks and Federal
savings associations who are indirect
members of a payment system.
Third, the rules of some payment
systems may not place a cap on the
operational liability of its members, but
a member’s operational liability may be
capped in some other way. For example,
a jurisdiction could have a law that does
not permit open-ended liability. If that
law applies to the payment system, it
could effectively cap a member’s
operational liability. In other situations,
a member may negotiate a separate
agreement with a payment system that
47 OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1140 (Jan. 13,
2014).
48 OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1157 (Nov. 12,
2017).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40801
allows the member to limit its potential
liability and, as a result, the risks of
membership in that payment system. To
address these situations, the OCC is
proposing to define ‘‘open-ended
liability’’ as liability for operational
losses that is not capped under the rules
of the payment system and includes
indemnifications provided to third
parties as a condition of membership in
the payment system. For example,
national banks and Federal savings
associations may provide open-ended
indemnifications to Federal Reserve
Banks as a condition of membership in
particular payment systems.49 This
proposed definition is consistent with
the definition of open-ended liability in
OCC Interpretive Letter 1140.
Fourth, although memberships in
payment systems expose national banks
and Federal savings associations to a
variety of risks, OCC legal precedent
only has addressed whether a national
bank may assume open-ended liability
for operational losses at the payment
system. Thus, the OCC is proposing to
define ‘‘operational loss’’ as a charge
resulting from sources other than
defaults by other members of the
payment system. Examples of these
operational losses would be losses that
are due to: Employee misconduct, fraud,
misjudgment, or human error;
management failure; information
systems failures; disruptions from
internal or external events that result in
the degradation or failure of services
provided by the payment system; or
payment or settlement delays,
constrained liquidity, contagious
disruptions, and resulting litigation.
These examples are listed in OCC
Interpretive Letter 1140.50 The OCC
requests comment as to whether these
examples should be included in this
definition. If these examples should be
included, the OCC also requests
comment as to whether the examples
listed are appropriate and whether the
list is sufficiently comprehensive or
whether other examples should be
included.
Finally, the OCC recognizes that
payment systems transfer funds for a
variety of purposes and in varying
amounts. For example, wholesale
payment systems typically process large
dollar transfers while retail payment
systems may process a higher volume of
transactions at a lower average dollar
figure.51 The OCC proposes to define
‘‘payment system’’ in § 7.1026 to mean
a ‘‘financial market utility’’ as defined
49 Id.
50 OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1140.
IT Examination Handbook, Retail
Payment Systems at 2 (Apr. 2016).
51 FFIEC
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
40802
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
in 12 U.S.C. 5462(6), wherever it
operates. This definition would
therefore include payment systems that
operate either in the U.S. or in a foreign
jurisdiction. Section 5462(6) provides
that ‘‘a financial market utility’’ means
‘‘any person that manages or operates a
multilateral system for the purpose of
transferring, clearing, or settling
payments, securities, or other financial
transactions among financial
institutions or between financial
institutions and the person’’ with
certain exclusions.52 but would exclude
derivatives clearing organizations
registered under the Commodity
Exchange Act and clearing agencies
registered under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and foreign
organizations that would be considered
a derivatives clearing organization or
clearing agency were it operating in the
United States. The OCC requests
comment on whether to include a
definition of payment system and, if so,
whether this definition and the three
exclusions listed are appropriate. The
OCC also requests comment on whether
the definition appropriately
encompasses both foreign and domestic
payment systems that national banks
and Federal savings associations may
join, including whether the proposed
language properly excludes foreign
equivalents of U.S.-registered
derivatives clearing organizations and
U.S.-registered clearing agencies.
Notice requirements. Proposed
§ 7.1026(c) would require a national
bank or Federal savings association to
provide written notice to the
52 Financial market utility ‘‘does not include:
designated contract markets, registered futures
associations, swap data repositories, and swap
execution facilities registered under the Commodity
Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), or national
securities exchanges, national securities
associations, alternative trading systems, securitybased swap data repositories, and swap execution
facilities registered under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.), solely by reason
of their providing facilities for comparison of data
respecting the terms of settlement of securities or
futures transactions effected on such exchange or by
means of any electronic system operated or
controlled by such entities, provided that the
exclusions in this clause apply only with respect to
the activities that require the entity to be so
registered’’ nor ‘‘any broker, dealer, transfer agent,
or investment company, or any futures commission
merchant, introducing broker, commodity trading
advisor, or commodity pool operator, solely by
reason of functions performed by such institution
as part of brokerage, dealing, transfer agency, or
investment company activities, or solely by reason
of acting on behalf of a financial market utility or
a participant therein in connection with the
furnishing by the financial market utility of services
to its participants or the use of services of the
financial market utility by its participants, provided
that services performed by such institution do not
constitute critical risk management or processing
functions of the financial market utility.’’ 12 U.S.C.
5462(6)(B).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
appropriate OCC supervisory office 30
days prior to joining a payment system
that would expose it to open-ended
liability. If the payment system does not
expose the national bank or Federal
savings association to open-ended
liability, the proposed rule would
require the national bank or Federal
savings association instead to provide
after-the-fact written notice within 30
days of becoming a member of the
payment system. The OCC believes
membership in a payment system that
exposes members to open-ended
liability creates additional risks for
national banks and Federal savings
associations. Thus, the OCC believes
prior notice to the OCC is appropriate in
these situations.53
Content of notice. Proposed
§ 7.1026(d) would provide that all
notices filed under § 7.1026 must
include representations that the national
bank or Federal savings association has
complied with the safety and soundness
review required by proposed
§ 7.1026(e)(1) before joining the
payment system and will comply with
the safety and soundness review and the
notification requirements in proposed
§ 7.1026(e)(2) and (e)(3) after joining the
system. For after-the-fact notices
pursuant to paragraph (c)(2), the
proposed rule would require a national
bank or Federal savings association to
include a representation that either the
rules of the payment system do not
impose liability for operational losses
on members or that the national bank’s
or Federal savings association’s liability
for operational losses is limited by the
rules of the payment system to specific
and appropriate limits that do not
exceed the legal lending limit specified
by 12 CFR part 32 or a lower limit
established for the national bank or
Federal savings association by the OCC.
Safety and soundness procedures.
The OCC relies upon a number of
resources to communicate in detail its
safety and soundness guidance for
national bank and Federal savings
association memberships in payment
systems.54 At a minimum, the OCC
53 The proposed notice requirement would not
apply to existing payment system memberships.
However, as explained below, the proposed rule
would require national banks and Federal savings
associations to continuously inform the OCC of
changes to bank operations that would affect the
institution’s risk profile. Thus, the OCC would be
made aware of any payment system membership at
a bank or savings association even though the
specific timing and information required by this
proposed rule would not apply to existing payment
systems memberships.
54 See, e.g., FFIEC IT Examination Handbook on
Retail Payment Systems (Apr. 2016); FFIEC IT
Examination Handbook on Wholesale Payment
Systems (July 2004); Comptroller’s Handbook:
Payment Systems and Funds Transfer Activities
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
believes a national bank or Federal
savings association must be able to
identify, evaluate, and control its risks
from membership in a particular
payment system both before joining the
system and on an ongoing basis.55
Proposed § 7.1026(e) would require as a
prerequisite to joining a payment system
and on a continual basis after joining
that the national bank or Federal savings
association: (1) Identify and evaluate the
risks posed by membership in the
payment system, taking into account
whether the liability is limited, and (2)
measure, monitor, and control those
risks. To assist with these requirements
in paragraph (e), national banks and
Federal savings associations should
review the standards outlined in OCC
Interpretive Letter 1140 and OCC
Banking Circular 235. The proposal also
requires a national bank or Federal
savings association to notify the
appropriate OCC supervisory office if its
ongoing risk management identifies a
safety and soundness concern, such as
a material change to the bank’s or
savings association’s liability or
indemnification responsibilities, as soon
as that concern is identified and to take
appropriate actions to remediate the
risk. The OCC requests comment on
whether to include any of the criteria
outlined in OCC Interpretive Letter 1140
and OCC Banking Circular 235 related
to the analysis of: (1) The payment
system and its membership criteria and
(2) criteria for an effective risk
management program to the safety and
soundness requirements in paragraph
(e).
The OCC recognizes that a national
bank’s or Federal savings association’s
liability will vary from payment system
to payment system. For example, the
rules of some payment systems may
expose members to open-ended liability
for operational losses but, in reality, the
national bank’s or Federal savings
association’s liability is limited by
separately negotiated agreements,
controlling laws of the jurisdiction, or
some other means. Therefore, the
proposal also would permit a national
bank or Federal savings association to
consider its open-ended liability to a
particular payment system to be limited
for purposes of the review required by
proposed § 7.1026(e)(1) and (2) if the
(March 1990); OCC Banking Circular 235 (May 10,
1989).
55 For example, OCC Banking Circular 235 states
‘‘Management of each national bank is responsible
for assessing risk in each payment, clearing, and
settlement system in which the bank participates.
Management must adopt adequate policies,
procedures, and controls with respect to these
activities.’’ The OCC applied this Banking Circular
to Federal savings associations on Oct. 1, 2014.
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
bank or savings association obtains an
independent legal opinion prior to
joining the payment system. That legal
opinion must describe how the payment
system allocates liability for operational
losses and conclude the potential
liability for the national bank or Federal
savings association is limited to specific
and appropriate limits that do not
exceed the legal lending limit specified
by 12 CFR part 32 or a lower limit
established for the national bank or
Federal savings association by the OCC.
This legal opinion would enable the
OCC to verify that the liability of the
national bank or Federal savings
association is limited even though the
rules of the payment system do not
provide any limits. If there are material
changes to the liability or
indemnification requirements of the
national bank or Federal savings
association after the bank or savings
association joins the payment system, it
can no longer rely on that legal opinion
to demonstrate that its liability is
limited and must notify the OCC and
remediate its risks as described in
§ 7.1026(e)(3).
Establishment and Operation of a
Remote Service Unit by a National Bank
(New § 7.1027/§ 7.4003)
Section 7.4003 provides that a bank
can establish and operate a remote
service unit (RSU) pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
24(Seventh). This section further states
that an RSU does not constitute a
branch under 12 U.S.C. 36(j) and is not
subject to State geographic or
operational restrictions or licensing
laws. Section 7.4003 defines an RSU as
an automated facility, operated by a
customer of a bank, that conducts
banking functions such as receiving
deposits, paying withdrawals, or
lending money. This section provides
examples of an RSU, specifically listing
an automated teller machine (ATMs),
automated loan machine, automated
device for receiving deposits, personal
computer, telephone, and other similar
electronic devices. Finally, this section
notes that an RSU may be equipped
with a telephone or tele-video device
that allows contact with bank personnel.
The OCC has historically treated drop
boxes as branches based on the 1969
Supreme Court case First National Bank
in Plant City, Florida v. Dickinson, 396
U.S. 122 (1969) (Plant City). In Plant
City, the Supreme Court ruled that a
drop box operated by a national bank
constituted a branch under 12 U.S.C.
36(j) because it was a place ‘‘at which
deposits are received.’’ 56 However, in
1996, Congress amended the definition
56 Plant
City, 396 U.S. 122 at 137.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
of ‘‘branch’’ in 12 U.S.C. 36(j) to provide
that ‘‘[t]he term ‘branch,’ as used in this
section, does not include an automated
teller machine or a remote service
unit.’’ 57 Thus, the holding in Plant City
is legislatively overruled with respect to
any banking facility that is an ATM or
an RSU.
As noted, the current definition of
‘‘RSU’’ in § 7.4003 requires an RSU to be
automated.58 However, upon further
consideration, the OCC believes that
interpreting both the terms ATM and
RSU to require automation leads to
incongruous results whereby a nonautomated facility such as a drop box is
considered a branch whereas an
automated facility such as an ATM is
not, despite a drop box functioning less
like a full branch than an ATM.
Furthermore, the OCC finds that drop
boxes have more in common with the
types of devices already considered
RSUs than with full-service branches
and therefore are more appropriately
classified as RSUs. Accordingly, the
OCC is proposing to amend § 7.4003 to
expand the definition of an RSU to
include either an automated or
unstaffed facility and to add drop boxes
to the list of RSU examples. This would
allow unstaffed facilities, such as drop
boxes, to receive the same branching
treatment as ATMs and other devices
already classified as RSUs such as
computers and automated loan
machines. This amendment would
provide national banks with a
significant degree of flexibility and
burden relief in the establishment of
drop boxes. We note that if the OCC
finalizes this amendment, it also will
amend 12 CFR 5.30(d) to remove ‘‘drop
box’’ from the definition of ‘‘branch.’’
Because the OCC is proposing changes
to this definition in another
rulemaking,59 the OCC has not proposed
this technical amendment in this
proposed rule.
The OCC also is proposing to move
§ 7.4003 to subpart A of part 7 as new
§ 7.1027. This change would place it in
the same subpart as other
interpretations regarding branching and
non-branching functions, thereby
improving the organization of part 7.
57 Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1996 (EGRPRA), Public Law 104–
208, 110 Stat. 3009, Section 2204 (1996).
58 In 1997, the OCC issued an interpretive letter
which explained that the OCC did not view a drop
box to be an RSU because they are not automated.
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 772 (March 6, 1997).
59 See Articles of Association, Charters, and
Bylaw Amendments (Forms), Comptroller’s
Licensing Manual (June 19, 2017).
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40803
Establishment and Operation of a
Deposit Production Office by a National
Bank (New § 7.1028/§ 7.4004)
Section 7.4004 provides that a
national bank or its operating subsidiary
may engage in deposit production
activities at a site other than the main
office or a branch of the bank, and
further provides that a deposit
production office (DPO) may solicit
deposits, provide information about
deposit products, and assist persons in
completing application forms and
related documents to open a deposit
account. Section 7.4004 specifically
states that a DPO is not a branch so long
as the site does not receive deposits, pay
withdrawals, or make loans. It further
states that all deposit and withdrawal
transactions of a bank customer using a
DPO must be performed by the
customer, either in person at the main
office or a branch office of the bank or
by mail, electronic transfer, or a similar
method of transfer. Finally, this section
states that a national bank may use the
services of persons not employed by the
bank in its deposit production activities.
As with § 7.4003, the OCC is proposing
to move § 7.4004 to subpart A of part 7
as new § 7.1028 to place it in the same
subpart as other interpretations
regarding branching and non-branching
functions. This change would improve
the organization of part 7. The OCC is
proposing no other changes to this
section except for a non-substantive
change to its wording.
Combination of National Bank Loan
Production Office, Deposit Production
Office, and Remote Service Unit (New
§ 7.1029/§ 7.4005)
Section 7.4005 provides that a
location at which a national bank
operates a loan production office (LPO),
a DPO, and an RSU is not a ‘‘branch’’
within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. 36(j) by
virtue of that combination of operations
because none of these locations
individually constitutes a branch.
The OCC is proposing to add language
regarding the extent of the permissible
interaction between bank personnel and
the RSU at a facility that combines a
loan production office or a deposit
production office with an RSU. The
proposed addition provides that an RSU
at a combined location must be
primarily operated by the customer with
at most delimited assistance from bank
personnel. This language is based on
published OCC precedent.60
As with §§ 7.4003 and 7.4004, the
OCC also is proposing to move § 7.4005
to subpart A of part 7, as new § 7.1029.
60 OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1165 (June 28,
2019).
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
40804
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
This change would place this section in
the same subpart as other
interpretations regarding branching and
non-branching functions. This change
would improve the organization of part
7.
Permissible Derivatives Activities for
National Banks (New § 7.1030)
Certain derivatives activities are
permissible for national banks under 12
U.S.C. 24(Seventh). A national bank
may engage in derivatives activities that
reference certain rates or assets that are
permissible for bank investment. In
addition, a national bank may use
derivatives to hedge the risks of its
permissible banking activities. Finally,
with prior notification to the bank’s
examiner-in-charge (EIC), a national
bank may engage as a financial
intermediary in customer-driven
derivatives activities. Congress has
recognized national banks’ authority to
engage in derivatives activities in
various statutes.61
The OCC is proposing to issue a new
§ 7.1030 addressing derivatives
activities permissible for national banks.
This new section would incorporate and
streamline the framework in OCC
interpretive letters discussing bankpermissible derivatives activities. The
proposed rule addresses five functional
categories of permissible derivatives
activities: (1) Derivatives referencing
underlyings a national bank may
purchase directly as an investment; (2)
derivatives with any underlying to
hedge the risks arising from bankpermissible activities; (3) derivatives
with any underlying that are customerdriven, cash-settled and either perfectlymatched or portfolio-hedged; (4)
derivatives with any underlying that are
customer-driven and physically-settled
by transitory title transfer; and (5)
derivatives with any underlying that are
customer-driven, physically-settled
(other than by transitory title transfer),
and physically-hedged.
The proposed rule also would include
a requirement that a national bank
provide written notice to its EIC prior to
engaging in certain derivatives
activities. This requirement would be
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
61 See,
e.g., 12 U.S.C. 84 (incorporating credit
exposure from derivatives into the legal lending
limit); Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Pub. L. 106–102,
113 Stat. 1338, section 206(a)(6) (defining
‘‘identified banking product’’ to include any swap
agreement except an equity swap with a retail
customer); 12 U.S.C. 371c (defining ‘‘covered
transaction’’ between a bank and its affiliates to
include a derivative transaction); Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub.
L. 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376, (Dodd-Frank Act)
section 716 (15 U.S.C. 8305); Dodd-Frank Act
section 731 (7 U.S.C. 6s); Dodd-Frank Act section
764 (15 U.S.C. 78o–10).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
consistent with prior OCC
interpretations that have, in connection
with affirming the permissibility of a
derivatives activity in which a bank has
sought to engage, directed the bank to
notify its EIC of the details of the bank’s
business and management practices for
performing that particular derivatives
activity as a financial intermediary. As
with all permissible activities within the
business of banking, derivative activities
are subject to all other applicable laws
and regulations, as well as prudential
safety and soundness standards.
The proposal is intended to describe
the derivatives activities that are legally
permissible for a national bank,
including activities that require a bank
to provide notice to the OCC prior to
engaging in the activity. Providing this
information in a regulation is expected
to promote clarity and transparency
and, ultimately, reduce compliance
burden. These proposed changes also
can help ensure consistent practices
across institutions when a national bank
seeks to commence or expand
derivatives activities. OCC rules for
Federal savings associations are
currently set forth at 12 CFR 163.172.
This rule provides that a Federal savings
association may engage in a transaction
involving a financial derivative
provided that the savings association is
authorized to invest in the assets
underlying the derivative, the
transaction is safe and sound, and the
association’s board of directors and
management satisfy certain prudential
requirements. It also states that, in
general, a Federal savings association
should engage in a financial derivative
transaction only to reduce its risk
exposure. Because Federal savings
associations have different statutory
authority for derivative activities, the
OCC has not proposed to include
Federal savings associations in § 7.1030.
However, the OCC is considering
moving § 163.172 to part 7 so that the
derivative rules for both charters are
located in the same part. This move
would better organize OCC rules. The
specifics of the proposal are discussed
below.
Authority. Paragraph (a) of new
§ 7.1030 would specify that the section
is issued pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 24
(Seventh). Paragraph (a) would further
specify that a national bank may only
engage in derivatives transactions in
accordance with the requirements of
this section.
Definitions. In paragraph (b), the
proposed rule incorporates several
terms that are commonly used in OCC
derivatives interpretive letters. The
proposed rule also defines certain terms
for the first time to promote
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
transparency and consistency among
institutions.
• Customer-driven. The proposed rule
would define ‘‘customer-driven’’ to
mean a transaction entered into for a
customer’s valid and independent
business purpose. This approach is
consistent with OCC interpretive
letters.62 This focus on the customer
recognizes that a number of derivatives
activities are permissible for a national
bank because the bank is acting as a
financial intermediary for the customer.
A customer-driven transaction would
not include a transaction entered into
for the purpose of speculating in
derivative, currency, commodity, or
security prices.63 Similarly, a customerdriven transaction would not include a
transaction the principal purpose of
which is to deliver to a national bank
assets that the national bank could not
invest in directly.
• Perfectly-matched. OCC
interpretive letters have permitted
national banks to engage in various
customer-driven, cash settled
derivatives transactions if they are
perfectly-matched. In determining that
national banks may engage in perfectlymatched derivatives, the OCC found it
material that the bank would be exposed
only to credit risk.64 OCC interpretive
letters have typically used ‘‘perfectlymatched’’ to describe two back-to-back
transactions in which all economic
terms match and in which the bank’s
primary exposure is credit risk because
the matched transactions offset one
another’s market risk.65 The OCC
proposes to incorporate a substantially
similar definition into the rule, with
certain clarifications. Specifically, the
OCC proposes to define perfectlymatched to mean two back-to-back
transactions that offset risk with respect
to all economic terms (e.g., amount,
maturity, duration, and underlying).
Consistent with OCC interpretive letters,
this definition would allow transactions
to be considered ‘‘perfectly-matched’’
despite a difference in price between
two derivatives when that difference
62 E.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1160 (Aug. 22,
2018).
63 OCC interpretations have specified that
customer-driven derivatives transactions do not
include transactions entered into for the purpose of
speculating in the underlying commodity or
security prices. See e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No.
1033 (Jun. 14, 2015); OCC Interpretive Letter No.
892 (September 13, 2000); OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 684 (Aug. 4, 1995); OCC No-Objection Letter
90–1 (Feb. 16, 1990).
64 See e.g., OCC No-Objection Letter No. 87–5 (Jul.
20, 1987).
65 See e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1039
(Sept. 13, 2005).
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
reflects the bank’s intermediation fee (in
the form of a spread).66
• Portfolio-hedged. OCC interpretive
letters have discussed the permissibility
of portfolio hedging with respect to
specified types of underlyings. These
letters have typically used ‘‘portfoliohedged’’ to describe the practice of
hedging the net residual risk position in
a portfolio of positions.67 This method
of hedging can reduce transactional
costs and operational risks because
fewer transactions need to be executed
relative to perfectly-matched hedging
(in which the bank must offset each
transaction on an individual basis).68
The OCC proposes to incorporate into
the rule a substantially similar
definition with certain clarifications.
Specifically, the OCC proposes to define
‘‘portfolio-hedged’’ to mean that a
portfolio of transactions is hedged based
on net unmatched positions or
exposures in the portfolio. The
proposed definition refers to unmatched
‘‘positions or exposures’’ to clarify that
hedging on a portfolio basis may involve
hedging based on various risk exposures
with different instruments in
accordance with applicable policies and
procedures and risk limits of the bank.
• Physical hedging or physicallyhedged. The OCC has issued guidance
recognizing that it is permissible for
national banks to utilize physical
positions, including physical positions
in certain commodities, to hedge their
customer-driven derivatives activities
under certain conditions.69 The OCC
proposes to define ‘‘physical hedging’’
and ‘‘physically-hedged’’ to mean
holding title to or acquiring ownership
of an asset (for example, by warehouse
receipt or book entry) to manage the
risks arising out of permissible
derivatives transactions. This definition
is intended to be consistent with the
description of commodities physical
hedging activities that the OCC has
identified as permissible in prior
interpretive letters and in OCC Bulletin
2015–35. This definition would also
apply to physical hedging of customerdriven derivatives referencing
securities. As described further below,
OCC interpretive letters have recognized
the permissibility of physical hedging of
66 OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1110 (Jan. 30,
2009).
67 See e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073 (Oct.
19, 2006); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1060 (Apr.
26, 2006).
68 See e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1060.
69 OCC Bulletin 2015–35, Quantitative Limits on
Physical Commodity Transactions (Aug. 4, 2015);
see also OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1040 (Sept. 15,
2005); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 935 (May 14,
2002); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 632 (Jun. 30, 1993).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
customer-driven derivatives with
securities (i.e., taking ownership of the
relevant security to hedge the customerdriven transaction), including securities
that a national bank could not purchase
as an investment under 12 CFR part 1.70
In this context, consistent with prior
OCC interpretations,71 ‘‘physical
hedging’’ involving securities would
include taking ownership of a security,
by book-entry or otherwise. Section
7.1030(e) of the proposed rule includes
additional requirements applicable to
physical hedging activities.72
• Physical settlement or physicallysettled. OCC interpretive letters
recognize the permissibility of physical
settlement conducted as part of a
national bank’s derivatives financial
intermediation activities in limited
circumstances. Under existing
interpretive letters and the proposed
rule, engaging in physical settlement
with respect to an underlying would
entail providing a notice to the OCC.73
The OCC proposes to define ‘‘physical
settlement’’ and ‘‘physically-settled’’ to
mean a transaction is settled by
accepting title to or acquiring ownership
of the underlying asset (whether a
commodity, security, or emissions
allowance). Physical settlement stands
in contrast to cash-settled transactions.
In cash-settled transactions,
counterparties do not exchange the
underlying assets. Rather, they exchange
cash payments based on the price of the
underlying. For purposes of the
proposed rule, physical settlement
includes transitory title transfer, which
is discussed below.
• Transitory title transfer. OCC
interpretive letters recognize the
permissibility of settling a derivatives
transaction by transitory title transfer of
the underlying asset in limited
circumstances. Transitory title transfer
is a means of physical settlement in
which a counterparty only briefly holds
title to the underlying asset. Consistent
with prior OCC interpretive letters,74 the
OCC proposes to define ‘‘transitory title
transfer’’ to mean a transaction is settled
by accepting and immediately
relinquishing title to an asset. Transitory
70 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1090 (Oct.
25, 2007); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1064 (Jul. 13,
2006); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1018 (Feb. 10,
2005); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 935; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 892.
71 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1090;
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1064; OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 1018; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 935;
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892.
72 See proposed rule § 7.1030(e).
73 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1040;
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 935; OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 684; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 632.
74 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 962 (Apr.
21, 2003).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40805
title transfer does not entail a bank
taking physical possession of a
commodity.75
• Underlying. OCC interpretive letters
have long analyzed derivatives
transactions based on the underlying
reference asset, rate, obligation, index,
etc. The OCC proposes to define
‘‘underlying’’ as the reference asset, rate,
obligation, or index on which the
payment obligation(s) between
counterparties to a derivatives
transaction is based.
The OCC specifically requests
comment on whether the proposed
definitions accurately reflect the terms
used in OCC interpretive letters and
whether any of these terms, in particular
‘‘perfectly-matched’’ and ‘‘portfoliohedged,’’ would benefit from further
clarification. Further, the OCC requests
comment on whether national banks
would be able to determine effectively
which activities meet these definitions
and, specifically, whether the OCC
should elaborate on the characteristics
of transactions that will be considered
perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged.
The OCC requests comment on whether
it should include a definition of the
term ‘‘derivative’’ in the final rule and
whether a definition of this term would
be necessary to appropriately scope the
proposed provision and whether any
definition would be workable in
practice. To the extent a definition of
‘‘derivative’’ is necessary, the OCC
suggests that it be defined as follows:
A contract, agreement, swap, warrant,
note, or option that is based, in whole
or in part, on the value of, any interest
in, or any quantitative measure or the
occurrence of any event relating to, one
or more commodities, securities,
currencies, interest or other rates,
indexes, or other assets, except a
derivative does not include a:
(1) Retail forex transaction, as defined
in 12 CFR 48.2;
(2) Security;
(3) Loan or loan participation;
(4) Deposit;
(5) Banker’s acceptance; or
(6) Letter of credit.
The OCC requests comment on this
possible definition.
Permissible Derivatives Activities
Generally. The proposed rule would
address five categories of permissible
derivatives activities. These categories
are discussed below.
75 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073;
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1060; OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 1025 (Apr. 25, 2005); OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 962; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684. See
also 81 FR 96355 (Dec. 30, 2016) (explaining
‘‘transitory title transfer typically does not entail
physical possession of a commodity; the ownership
occurs solely to facilitate the underlying transaction
and lasts only for a moment in time.’’).
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
40806
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
• Derivatives Referencing
Underlyings in which a National Bank
May Invest Directly. OCC interpretive
letters have recognized that national
banks may engage in derivatives
activities where the derivative
references assets that a national bank
could purchase directly as an
investment.76 For example, to manage
its investment portfolio, a national bank
may use derivatives tied to interest
rates, foreign exchange and currency,
credit, precious metals, and investment
securities. Section 7.1030(c)(1) of the
proposed rule would reflect this
authority by specifying that a national
bank may engage in derivatives
transactions with payments based on
underlyings that a national bank is
permitted to purchase directly as an
investment. Paragraph (c)(1) would
address only derivatives on underlyings
that a national bank would be permitted
to purchase directly as principal. For
example, an underlying that a national
bank could hold only as a
nonconforming investment under 12
CFR part 1 or only in satisfaction of
debts previously contracted would not
be a permissible underlying under this
paragraph.
• Hedging Bank-Permissible
Activities with Derivatives.
Under 12 U.S.C. 24 (Seventh), a
national bank may engage in activities
that are part of, or incidental to, the
business of banking. Risk management
activities, such as hedging risks arising
from bank activities, are part of the
business of banking.77 Entering into
deposit, loan, and other contracts with
customers and engaging in other bankpermissible activities involve risks that
a bank must manage as part of the
business of banking. A bank must
manage the risk of those activities to
operate profitably and in a safe and
sound manner.78 A bank may engage in
hedging activities to manage these
76 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 494 (Dec.
20, 1989); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 422 (Apr. 11,
1988); OCC No Objection Letter No. 86–13 (Aug. 8,
1986). See also, ‘‘Report to Congress and the
Financial Stability Oversight Council Pursuant to
Section 620 of the Dodd-Frank Act’’ at 86–90
(September 2016), available at https://
www.occ.treas.gov/publications-and-resources/
publications/banker-education/files/pub-report-tocongress-sec-620-dodd-frank.pdf (Section 620
Report).
77 See Decision of the Office of the Comptroller
of the Currency on the Request by Chase Manhattan
Bank, N.A. to Offer the Chase Market Index
Investment Deposit (1988) (MII Deposit); Investment
Company Institute v. Ludwig, 884 F. Supp. 4 (D.D.C.
1995) (upholding Comptroller’s decision that the
hedged deposit in MII Deposit is a bank-permissible
product that did not violate the Glass-Steagall Act).
78 See generally MII Deposit; OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 892.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
risks.79 The OCC has long recognized
that a national bank may hedge its risk
using derivatives on underlyings that a
national bank would be permitted to
invest in directly. For example, a
national bank may use futures contracts
on exchange, coin, or bullion to hedge
activities conducted pursuant to a
national bank’s statutory authority to
buy and sell exchange, coin, or bullion.
Similarly, a national bank may use
futures to hedge against the risk of loss
due to the interest rate fluctuations
inherent in bank loan operations, U.S.
Treasury Bills, and certificates of
deposit.
• Hedging with Derivatives
Referencing Underlyings in which a
National Bank May Not Invest Directly.
The OCC also has recognized that a
national bank may hedge the risks of
bank-permissible activities using
derivatives on underlyings in which a
national bank may not invest directly.
For example, in OCC Interpretive Letter
896, the OCC recognized that a national
bank may purchase cash-settled options
on commodity futures contracts to
hedge the risk of a commodity that
served as collateral on an agricultural
loan.80 Similarly, the OCC has
recognized that it is permissible for a
trust bank to hedge the market risk
associated with the fees it received from
its investment advisory activities using
equity derivatives.81 Likewise, the OCC
has determined that a national bank
may purchase certain equity derivatives
to hedge the risks of a deposit account
that paid interest based, in part, upon
changes in the Standard & Poor’s 500
Composite Stock Index.82 The OCC also
has recognized that it is permissible for
a national bank to use commodity
derivatives to hedge commodity price
risk associated with a production
payment loan.83
The proposed rule would recognize a
national bank’s authority to hedge bankpermissible activities using derivatives
on underlyings in which a bank could
not invest directly. Section 7.1030(c)(2)
of the proposed rule would provide that
a national bank may engage in
derivatives transactions with any
underlying to hedge the risks arising
from bank-permissible activities after
providing notice to its EIC.84
79 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 896 (Aug. 21,
2000); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892.
80 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 896.
81 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1037 (Aug. 9,
2005).
82 See MII Deposit.
83 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1117 (May 19,
2009).
84 In contrast, if a national bank engaged in
hedging using derivatives on underlyings in which
a national bank could invest directly, the bank
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
• Derivatives Financial
Intermediation for Customers.
OCC interpretive letters have long
recognized that a national bank may act
as a financial intermediary in customerdriven 85 derivatives transactions on a
variety of reference assets as part of the
business of banking.86 These letters
have recognized national banks’
authority to enter into cash-settled,
customer-driven derivatives
transactions both on a perfectlymatched 87 and portfolio-hedged basis.88
The OCC has explained that these
derivatives activities ‘‘are, at their
essence, modern forms of financial
intermediation’’ because ‘‘through
intermediated exchanges of payments,
banks facilitate the flow of funds within
our economy and serve important
financial risk management and other
financial needs of bank customers.’’ 89
would not need to provide notice under the
proposed rule because this activity could be
conducted under proposed rule § 7.1030(c)(1). See
proposed rule § 7.1030(c)(1), (d).
85 A ‘‘customer-driven’’ transaction is one entered
into for a customer’s valid and independent
business purposes. See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 1160; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892. This
definition is addressed in § 7.1030(b) of the
proposed rule.
86 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 937 (Jun.
27, 2002); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892; NoObjection Letter 87–5.
87 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1110
(longevity indexes); OCC Interpretive Letter No.
1101 (Jul. 7, 2008) (certain risk indexes); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1089 (Oct. 15, 2007);
(specific property indexes); OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 1081 (May 15, 2007) (specific property
indexes); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1079 (Apr. 19,
2007) (inflation indexes); OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 1065 (Jul. 24, 2006) (petroleum products,
agricultural oils, grains and grain derivatives, seeds,
fibers, foodstuffs, livestock/meat products, metals,
wood products, plastics and fertilizer); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1063 (Jun. 1, 2006) (hogs,
lean hogs, pork bellies, lumber, corrugated
cardboard, and polystyrene); OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 1059 (Apr. 13, 2006) (old corrugated
cardboard #11, polypropylene: injection molding
(copoly), polypropylene: all grades, Dow Jones AIG
Commodity Index); OCC Interpretive Letter No.
1056 (Mar. 29, 2006) (frozen concentrate orange
juice, polypropylene); OCC Interpretive Letter No.
1039 (crude oil, natural gas, heating oil, natural
gasoline, gasoline, unleaded gas, gasoil, diesel, jet
fuel, jet-kerosene, residual fuel oil, naphtha, ethane,
propane, butane, isobutane, crack spreads,
lightends, liquefied petroleum gases, natural gas
liquids, distillates, oil products, coal, emissions
allowances, benzene, dairy, cattle, wheat, corn,
soybeans, soybean meal, soybean oil, cocoa, coffee,
cotton, orange juice, sugar, paper, rubber, steel,
aluminum, zinc, lead, nickel, tin, cobalt, iridium,
rhodium, freight, high density polyethylene
(plastic), ethanol, methanol, newsprint, paper
(linerboard), pulp (kraft), and recovered paper
(newsprint)).
88 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073
(aluminum, nickel, lead, zinc, and tin); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1060 (coal); OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 1040 (emissions allowances); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 937 (electricity).
89 OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1110; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1101; OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 1079.
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
The OCC has also recognized in this
context the permissibility of physical
settlement by transitory title transfer.90
As described above, transitory title
transfer is a particular means of physical
settlement in which a counterparty only
briefly holds title to the underlying
asset. Transitory title transfer does not
entail a bank taking physical possession
of a commodity.91 Further, the OCC has
recognized that a national bank may
engage in customer-driven financial
intermediation derivatives activities that
are physically-settled (other than by
transitory title transfer) and to
physically hedge those derivatives in
certain circumstances.92 OCC
interpretive letters have explained that
physical delivery can help to reduce the
risk in customer-driven commodity
derivatives transactions if the activity is
conducted in accordance with safe and
sound banking practices and would
achieve a more accurate and precise
hedge than a cash-settled transaction.93
The OCC subsequently provided
guidance on safe and sound practices
with respect to physical hedges of
commodity-linked financial
transactions.94
The OCC proposes to incorporate and
streamline the framework contained in
its interpretive letters addressing
derivatives financial intermediation
activities in § 7.1030(c)(3) through (5).
First, under the proposed rule, a
national bank may engage in customerdriven, cash-settled derivatives
transactions on any underlying on a
perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged
basis.
Second, the proposed rule would
permit a national bank to engage in
customer-driven, perfectly-matched or
portfolio-hedged derivatives
transactions on any underlying that is
settled by transitory title transfer.
Third, the proposed rule would
permit physically settled and physically
hedged transactions that are either
perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged,
90 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073
(aluminum, nickel, lead, zinc, and tin); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1060 (coal); OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 1025 (electricity); Interpretive Letter No.
962 (electricity). The term ‘‘transitory title transfer’’
means accepting and instantaneously relinquishing
title to the commodity, as a party in a ‘‘chain of
title’’ transfer. OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1025.
91 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1060;
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684. See also 81 FR
96355 (Dec. 30, 2016) (explaining ‘‘transitory title
transfer typically does not entail physical
possession of a commodity; the ownership occurs
solely to facilitate the underlying transaction and
lasts only for a moment in time.’’).
92 See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1040;
OCC Interpretive Letter 892; OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 684.
93 E.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684.
94 See OCC Bulletin 2015–35.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
provided that the national bank does not
take physical delivery of any
commodity by receipt of physical
quantities of the commodity on bank
premises and the physical hedging
activities meet the requirements in
paragraph (e) of the proposed rule. As
discussed below, a national bank would
need to provide a written notice to its
EIC before engaging in financial
intermediation activities with
derivatives on underlyings in which a
national bank could not invest directly.
Relative to prior OCC interpretations,
the proposed rule would make fewer
distinctions based on the particular
underlying or how the national bank
hedges its derivatives financial
intermediation activity. While prior
interpretations typically analyzed both
the underlying and the bank’s method
for hedging the customer-driven
derivative (i.e., perfectly matched versus
portfolio hedged), the proposal would
permit customer-driven, cash-settled
derivatives transactions on any
underlying, whether perfectly-matched
or portfolio-hedged. The OCC
recognizes that financial intermediation
in derivatives continues to evolve and
that the markets for derivatives on
underlyings that the OCC has not
previously addressed may have
sufficient liquidity and depth to allow a
bank to conduct the activity as a
financial intermediary. Similarly, the
OCC recognizes that these same factors
may allow a national bank to hedge its
customer-driven derivatives activities in
evolving ways—whether by portfolio
hedging or physical hedging—consistent
with conducting the activity as a
financial intermediary.
As with any bank-permissible
activity, safety and soundness standards
apply to derivatives financial
intermediation activities. The proposal
would include additional requirements
for physical hedging activities in
§ 7.1020(e). The OCC requests comment
on whether the rule should reflect any
additional standards regarding the
underlyings that are permissible for
financial intermediation in derivatives
and how national banks may hedge
these activities. For example, the OCC
requests comment on whether the
regulation should include additional
language relating to the liquidity of the
market for permissible customer-driven
derivatives activities.
Notice requirement. OCC
interpretations have often included a
process in which the national bank
provides notice to its EIC about the
business and management practices the
bank will employ in performing the
derivatives activity as financial
intermediation. Consistent with prior
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40807
interpretive letters addressing
derivatives hedging or financial
intermediation activities, proposed
§ 7.1020(d) would require a national
bank to provide written notice to its EIC
prior to engaging in activity using
derivatives referencing assets that a
national bank could not invest in
directly.
OCC Interpretive Letter 1160
contemplates that a bank would provide
written notification to its EIC prior to
commencing a derivatives financial
intermediation business for a reference
asset addressed in prior OCC
interpretive letters. This process
replaced the no-objection process that
was typically included in prior OCC
interpretive letters.95 The proposal
would require a national bank to
provide a notice to its EIC prior to
commencing a financial intermediation
activity in derivatives on underlyings in
which a national bank could not invest
directly or expanding its financial
intermediation activities to include a
new category of underlyings.96
In addition, OCC interpretive letters
have contemplated that a national bank
would obtain a no-objection before
engaging in hedging activities using
derivatives on underlyings in which a
national bank could not invest
directly.97 The OCC is not proposing to
incorporate an EIC no-objection in
connection with these hedging
activities, and the proposal would
instead create a regulatory requirement
to provide notice to the national bank’s
EIC for these hedging activities
recognized in § 7.1030(c)(2) through the
proposed notice requirement in
§§ 7.1030(d)(1)(i)–(ii). The OCC expects
that transitioning from the no-objection
process for derivatives hedging
activities to the notice process will
enhance prudential supervision of bank
derivatives activities by ensuring that
banks evaluate the risks of the activities
both at inception and on an ongoing
basis.
Under the proposed rule, the notice
procedures and requirements in
proposed § 7.1030(d)(2) would be the
same for hedging activities and financial
intermediation activities. The proposed
rule would require the written notice to
include information that is substantially
similar to the information that is
discussed in Interpretive Letter 1160.
Specifically, the written notice must
95 See,
e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1065.
banks that have provided notice to or
received statements of no-objection from their EICs
for particular derivatives activities consistent with
the process in OCC interpretive letters would not
be required to submit new notices for those
activities.
97 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 896.
96 National
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
40808
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
include a detailed description of the
proposed activity, including the
relevant underlying(s); the anticipated
start date of activity; and a detailed
description of the bank’s risk
management system (policies,
processes, personnel, and control
systems) for identifying, measuring,
monitoring, and controlling the risks of
the activity. The proposed rule does not
include the requirement from
Interpretive Letter 1160 that the bank
submitting the notice identify an OCC
interpretive letter confirming the
permissibility of transactions involving
the underlying and hedging activity. If
the proposed rule is finalized,
derivatives hedging and financial
intermediation activities would be
conducted pursuant to the regulation,
without reference to prior OCC
interpretations. Therefore, the OCC does
not believe it would be necessary for a
national bank to identify a prior OCC
interpretation. The OCC believes that
this framework could ultimately reduce
the compliance burden associated with
national bank derivatives activities.
The proposed prior notice does not
impose a prior approval requirement.
Rather, the notice is designed to make
OCC supervisor aware of a bank’s
derivatives activities so that such
activities can be appropriately scoped
into OCC’s ongoing supervision and
oversight of the bank’s safety and
soundness. In addition, having
awareness of bank’s derivatives
activities will enable the OCC to raise
questions as to whether the derivatives
activity can be conducted in a safe and
sound manner, or whether the
derivatives activity is within the scope
of those legally authorized for a national
bank, before the bank activities
commence or at any time, as is the case
with any other permissible bank
activities.
Section 7.1030(d)(1) of the proposed
rule would require a national bank to
provide EIC notice prior to engaging in
any of the derivatives hedging or
financial intermediation activities
described in § 7.1030(c)(2) through (5)
for the first time. This notice
requirement would apply, for example,
if a bank has previously engaged in
cash-settled derivatives with respect to
a particular underlying as described in
§ 7.1030(c)(3) but seeks to begin
physically settling transactions as
described in § 7.1030(c)(4) or (5).
Likewise, a national bank would need to
provide notice prior to first engaging in
derivatives hedging activities pursuant
to § 7.1030(c)(2) or expanding the bank’s
derivatives hedging activities to include
a new category of underlying. Under
proposed § 7.1030(d)(2), the bank must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
submit written notice at least 30 days
before the national bank commences the
derivatives activity. The OCC
specifically requests comment on
whether it is sufficiently clear when a
notice would be required and what
would constitute a ‘‘new category of
underlying.’’ Prior OCC interpretations
have addressed several categories of
permissible underlyings for national
bank derivatives transactions.98 The
OCC requests comments on whether the
regulation text should list these
categories. If the regulation were to list
these categories, the OCC requests
comment on whether the regulation
should specify that any new derivatives
activities not falling within one of the
specified categories also requires notice.
The OCC believes that the proposed
notice process will provide an efficient
notice standard for national banks
engaging in derivatives activities. The
notice requirement is expected to
enhance supervision by providing bank
supervisors with comprehensive, up-todate information on the activities in
which the bank is engaged. This
information will assist OCC supervisors
by ensuring they have an opportunity to
assess a bank’s ability to engage in
derivatives activities in a safe and sound
manner prior to the bank commencing
the activity and provide them ongoing
information as those activities expand to
new categories. The OCC believes this
objective is particularly important in the
case of derivatives hedging and
financial intermediation activities
because these activities continue to
evolve.
The OCC specifically requests
comment on whether the final rule
should provide additional specificity
regarding the notice process and
whether any additional information
should be included in the notice.
Additional requirements for physical
hedging activities. The OCC has
elaborated in interpretive letters and
guidance on practices with respect to
physical hedging with securities and
commodities.99 The OCC proposes to
incorporate these practices into
proposed § 7.1030(e) with certain
modifications to promote consistency in
the practices national banks employ
with respect to physical hedging
activities. Specifically, the OCC
proposes to apply the framework in
interpretive letters addressing physical
hedging using securities to all physical
hedging activities involving underlyings
in which a national bank could not
e.g., supra, note 27.
OCC Bulletin 2015–35; OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 935; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892;
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684.
PO 00000
98 See
99 See
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
invest directly. Under the proposed
rule, a national bank could engage in
physical hedging only if: (1) The
national bank holds the underlying
solely to hedge risks arising from
derivatives transactions originated by
customers for the customers’ valid and
independent business purposes; (2) the
physical hedging activities offer a costeffective means to hedge risks arising
from permissible banking activities; (3)
the national bank does not take
anticipatory or maintain residual
positions in the underlying except as
necessary for the orderly establishment
or unwinding of a hedging position; and
(4) the national bank does not acquire
equity securities for hedging purposes
that constitute more than five percent of
a class of voting securities of any
issuer.100
Consistent with OCC interpretive
letters and guidance concerning
physical hedging with commodities in
which a national bank could not invest
directly,101 the proposed rule would
impose additional requirements on
physical hedging with commodities.
Under the proposed rule, a national
bank may engage in physical hedging
with commodities only if the national
bank’s commodity position (including,
as applicable, delivery point, purity,
grade, chemical composition, weight,
and size) is no more than five percent
of the gross notional value of the
national bank’s derivatives that: (1) Are
in that same particular commodity and
(2) allow for physical settlement within
30 days. Title to commodities acquired
and immediately sold in a transitory
title transaction would not count against
this five percent limit.102 Consistent
with OCC interpretive letters,103 the
proposed rule would permit physical
hedging involving commodities only if
the physical position more effectively
reduces risk than a cash-settled hedge
100 Certain of the practices described in prior OCC
interpretive letters are not included in the proposed
rule text because they are generally-applicable
safety and soundness standards that can be
evaluated and addressed under other existing
sources of law, including, as applicable, 12 U.S.C.
1818. For example, several interpretive letters
discuss that a national bank should have
appropriate risk management policies and
procedures for its physical hedging activities. In
addition, several interpretive letters have also
specified that a bank may not engage in physical
hedging activities for the purpose of speculating in
security or commodity prices. As described above,
customer-driven financial intermediation as defined
in the proposal would not include activities entered
into for the purpose of speculation.
101 See OCC Bulletin 2015–35; OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 684.
102 Consistent with OCC Interpretive Letter No.
1040, this 5 percent limit would not apply to
physical hedging using emissions allowances.
103 See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 632.
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
involving the same commodity. As
discussed above, a national bank may
not take physical delivery of any
commodity by receipt of physical
quantities of the commodity on bank
premises. The proposed rule would
apply these requirements to physical
hedging activities involving
commodities due to the unique risks of
physical commodity activities.104
Subpart B—National Bank Corporate
Practices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Corporate Governance (§ 7.2000)
As noted, the OCC continually seeks
to update its regulations to stay current
with industry changes and technological
advances, subject to Federal law and
consistent with the safe and sound
operation of the banking system. As part
of this process, the OCC is proposing to
update and modernize § 7.2000, which
provides a regulatory framework for
national bank corporate governance. As
described by the OCC in various
conditional approvals,105 ‘‘corporate
governance procedures’’ generally refer
to requirements involving the operation
and mechanics of the internal
organization of a national bank,
including relations among ownersinvestors, directors, and officers, and do
not include requirements that relate to
the banking powers or activities of a
national bank or relationships between
a national bank and customers or third
parties. Examples of corporate
governance procedures include, but are
not limited to, share exchanges, antitakeover provisions, and the use of
blank check procedures in issuing
preferred stock. The OCC issued
§ 7.2000 in 1996 to provide national
banks with increased flexibility to
structure their corporate governance
procedures consistent with the
particular needs of the bank while
providing shareholders and others with
adequate notice of the corporate
standards on which a bank will rely.106
The OCC has not substantively changed
§ 7.2000 since its adoption.107
Section 7.2000 currently provides that
a national bank proposing to engage in
a corporate governance procedure must
comply with applicable Federal banking
statutes and regulations and safe and
sound banking practices. In addition,
104 See Section 620 Report (describing the price
risks and operational risks specific to physical
commodities activities).
105 See e.g., OCC Conditional Approval No. 859
(June 13, 2008) and OCC Conditional Approval No.
696 (June 9, 2005).
106 61 FR 4849, 4854 (Feb. 9, 1996).
107 Non-substantive amendments to § 7.2000
changed the address and telephone number of the
OCC Communications Office. See 79 FR 15641
(March 21, 2014) and 80 FR 28345 (May 18, 2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
§ 7.2000 provides that to the extent not
inconsistent with applicable Federal
banking statutes or regulations, or bank
safety and soundness, a national bank
may elect to follow the corporate
governance procedures of the law of the
State in which the main office of the
bank is located, the law of the State in
which the holding company of the bank
is incorporated, Delaware General
Corporation Law, or the Model Business
Corporation Act. Further, § 7.2000
requires that a national bank designate
in its bylaws the body of law selected
for its corporate governance procedures.
Finally, § 7.2000 describes the process
for obtaining OCC staff positions on the
ability of a national bank to engage in
a particular corporate governance
procedure.
The OCC is proposing to amend
§ 7.2000 to reduce burden, provide
greater clarity, and modernize the
national bank charter with respect to
corporate governance provisions. These
proposed amendments also would
address anomalous results that may
arise when a national bank eliminates
its holding company. As a general
matter, the OCC is proposing to change
the term ‘‘corporate governance
procedure’’ used in § 7.2000 to
‘‘corporate governance provisions’’ and
to revise paragraph (a) of § 7.2000
accordingly. The OCC believes that
‘‘corporate governance procedure’’ may
be construed too narrowly than
intended and omit corporate governance
practices that are not procedural in
nature. Revised paragraph (a) would
provide that the corporate governance
provisions in a national bank’s articles
of association and bylaws and the
bank’s conduct of its corporate
governance affairs must comply with
applicable Federal banking statutes and
regulations and safe and sound banking
practices. The OCC does not intend this
change to affect the application of prior
OCC interpretations of corporate
governance procedures to § 7.2000.
The proposal would preserve the
current ability of a national bank to use
the corporate governance provisions of
the State in which the main office of the
bank is located, the State in which the
bank’s holding company is located, the
Delaware General Corporation Law, or
the Model Business Corporation Act.
The proposal, however, would increase
flexibility in three ways. First, the
proposal would revise paragraph (b) of
§ 7.2000 to authorize a national bank to
elect the corporate governance
provisions of the law of any State in
which any branch of the bank is located
in addition to the law of the State in
which the bank’s main office is located,
to the extent not inconsistent with
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40809
applicable Federal banking statutes or
regulations or safety and soundness.
Accordingly, a national bank would no
longer be limited to using the corporate
governance provisions of the State
where its main office is located. For
example, a national bank with its main
office in State A and branches in State
B and State C could elect to use the
corporate governance provisions of the
law of State A, State B, or State C.
Second, the proposal would revise
paragraph (b) to authorize the national
bank to use the law of the State where
a holding company of the bank is
incorporated. The proposal would
expressly recognize the possibility that
a national bank may be controlled by
more than one holding company and
that those holding companies may be
incorporated by different States.
Third, the proposal would add a new
paragraph (c) that would allow a
national bank to continue to use the
corporate governance provisions of the
law of the State where its holding
company is incorporated even if the
holding company is later eliminated or
no longer controls the bank, and the
national bank is not located in that
State. This change would remove an
impediment to a national bank that may
choose to eliminate its holding company
or is no longer controlled by that
holding company but wishes to retain
longstanding and familiar corporate
governance provisions.
The OCC seeks comment on whether
a national bank also should be able to
adopt a combination of corporate
governance provisions from the laws of
several different States where the
national bank and any holding
companies are located, thus potentially
resulting in a national bank following
corporate governance provisions that
derive from a combination of States’
laws, or whether a national bank should
be limited to electing and using the
corporate governance provisions of a
single State. If the OCC permits a
national bank to follow the corporate
governance provisions from more than
one State, the OCC seeks comment on
how to ensure that shareholders and
others are made aware of the provisions
that the bank has chosen.
The OCC also requests comment on
whether it should make, to the extent
appropriate, similar revisions to the
regulations pertaining to corporate
governance provisions for Federal
savings associations in 12 CFR 5.21 and
5.22, so that Federal savings
associations may elect to use the
corporate governance provisions of: (1)
Any State in which the Federal savings
association is located and (2) in the case
of Federal stock savings associations,
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
40810
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
the law of the State in which the
association’s former holding company
was incorporated. In addition, the OCC
requests comment on whether the final
rule should change the term ‘‘corporate
governance procedures’’ to ‘‘corporate
governance provisions’’ in §§ 5.21 and
5.22 to be consistent with the change in
terminology proposed for § 7.2000.
The proposal also would revise
current paragraph (c) of § 7.2000
(proposed to be redesignated as
§ 7.2000(d)). Current paragraph (c)
provides that the OCC considers
requests for the OCC staff’s position on
the ability of a national bank to engage
in a particular State corporate
governance provision in accordance
with the no-objection procedures set
forth in OCC Banking Circular 205 or
any subsequently published agency
procedures, and that requests should
demonstrate how the proposed practice
is not inconsistent with applicable
Federal statutes or regulations and is
consistent with bank safety and
soundness. The OCC issued Banking
Circular 205 on July 26, 1985 and has
not modified it since. However, a
national bank also may request the
views of the OCC on an interpretation
of national banking statutes and
regulations through an interpretive
letter, which has been the more
common approach since 1985. In order
to update this paragraph, the proposal
would remove the requirement that
requests for the OCC’s views on State
corporate governance provisions use the
no-objection procedure. The proposal
also lists the information that a request
must contain. This information, similar
to what is set forth in OCC Banking
Circular 205, would include: (1) The
name of the bank; (2) citations to the
State statutes or regulations involved;
(3) a discussion whether a similarly
situated State bank is subject to or may
adopt the corporate governance
provision; (4) identification of all
Federal banking statutes or regulations
that are on the same subject as, or
otherwise have a bearing on, the subject
of the proposed State corporate
governance provision; and (5) an
analysis of how the proposed corporate
governance provision is not inconsistent
with applicable Federal statutes or
regulations nor with bank safety and
soundness. The OCC notes that this
provision would not preclude a national
bank from seeking informal consultation
with OCC staff. However, if the bank
wants to receive a written response from
OCC staff, it should follow the
procedure in this proposed paragraph
(d).
Finally, the OCC requests comment
on whether it should revise the standard
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
it uses to apply the requirement in
§ 7.2000 that the State corporate
governance provision be ‘‘not
inconsistent with applicable Federal
banking statutes or regulations’’ to be
more flexible. The OCC has historically
viewed the standard as meaning that
State corporate governance provisions
may be used unless Federal law has a
different standard than State law, in
which case Federal law controls. That
is, if Federal law addresses a particular
corporate governance matter, then a
national bank must follow Federal law
on the matter and cannot supplement it
with State law. However, the ‘‘not
inconsistent’’ language could be
interpreted in a more flexible manner.
One could view a State provision that
imposed higher or more stringent
requirements as ‘‘not inconsistent’’ with
Federal law because a bank can comply
with both if it meets the State’s higher
requirement. Thus, the OCC could
permit a bank to adopt a State corporate
governance provision under § 7.2000
that imposed a higher or more stringent
standard than Federal law, as long as in
complying with the State provision the
bank also would meet the requirements
in Federal law. The OCC requests
comment on whether this change in the
interpretation of the ‘‘not inconsistent’’
standard would be helpful.
National Bank Adoption of AntiTakeover Provisions (7.2001)
The OCC is proposing to add a new
section § 7.2001 that would address the
extent to which a national bank may
include anti-takeover provisions in its
articles of association or bylaws.108
Anti-takeover provisions are examples
of corporate governance procedures 109
covered by 12 CFR 7.2000. As discussed
above, under current § 7.2000(b) a
national bank may elect to follow the
corporate governance procedures of
specified State law to the extent it is (1)
not inconsistent with applicable Federal
banking statutes or regulation and (2)
not inconsistent with bank safety and
soundness.
The purpose of proposed § 7.2001 is
to provide the OCC’s views about the
permissibility of several types of antitakeover provisions. Specifically,
proposed paragraph (a) of § 7.2001
would provide that a national bank may,
pursuant to 12 CFR 7.2000(b), adopt
anti-takeover provisions included in
108 OCC regulations currently include provisions
addressing adoption of anti-takeover provisions by
stock Federal savings associations. See 12 CFR
5.22(g)(7), (h) and (j)(2)(i)(A). The OCC is not
proposing to amend those provisions.
109 The proposed rule would change this
terminology in § 7.2000 to ‘‘corporate governance
provisions.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
State corporate governance law if the
provisions are not inconsistent with
Federal banking statutes or regulations
and not inconsistent with bank safety
and soundness.
Proposed paragraph (b) would set
forth the type of anti-takeover
provisions in State corporate
governance provisions that the OCC
specifically has determined are not
inconsistent with Federal banking
statutes or regulations.110 This list is not
exclusive and the OCC may find that
other State anti-takeover laws are not
inconsistent with Federal banking
statutes or regulations. A national bank
could elect to follow these provisions,
subject to the bank safety and soundness
limitation discussed below.
Restrictions on business combinations
with interested shareholders. These
State provisions prohibit, or permit the
corporation to prohibit in its certificate
of incorporation or other governing
document, the corporation from
engaging in a business combination
with an interested shareholder or any
related entity for a specified period of
time (e.g., three years) from the date on
which the shareholder first becomes an
interested shareholder (subject to
certain exceptions, such as board
approval). An interested shareholder is
one that owns an amount of stock
specified in the State statute, e.g., at
least fifteen percent. Federal banking
statutes and regulations do not address,
directly or indirectly, this type of
restriction for national banks. Although
Federal banking statutes authorize
national banks to engage in specified
consolidations and mergers,111 this
authorization does not preclude a bank’s
shareholders from adopting a provision
that limits the consolidations and
mergers into which the bank would
enter. Therefore, State restrictions on
business combinations with interested
shareholders are not inconsistent with
Federal law.
Poison pills. A ‘‘poison pill’’ is a State
statutory provision that provides, or that
permits the corporation to provide in its
certificate of incorporation or other
governing document, that all
shareholders, other than the hostile
acquiror, have the right to purchase
additional stock at a substantial
discount upon the occurrence of a
triggering event. Because no Federal
banking statutes or regulations directly
or indirectly address these shareholder
110 Permitting the use of staggered boards is
another anti-takeover provision. The proposed new
section does not include staggered boards because
they are now expressly permitted under the
National Bank Act. 12 U.S.C. 71; 12 CFR 2024.
111 See 12 U.S.C 215, 215a, 215a–1, 215a–3, and
215c.
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
purchase rights, State poison pill laws
are not inconsistent with Federal law.112
Requiring all shareholder actions to
be taken at a meeting. These State
provisions provide, or permit the
corporation to provide in its certificate
of incorporation or other governing
document, that all actions to be taken by
shareholders must occur at a meeting
and prohibit shareholders from taking
action by written consent. Certain
Federal banking statutes require
shareholder approval to be taken at a
meeting 113 while other sections require
shareholder approval but do not specify
a meeting.114 There is no provision in
Federal law authorizing national bank
shareholders to take action by written
consent in lieu of a meeting.
Furthermore, nothing in Federal law
precludes a national bank’s articles of
association from requiring a meeting for
any action. Therefore, this type of State
provision is not inconsistent with
Federal law.
Limits on shareholders’ authority to
call special meetings. These State
provisions provide, or permit the
corporation to provide in its certificate
of incorporation or other governing
document, that only the board of
directors, and not shareholders, have
the right to call special meetings of the
shareholders or, if shareholders have the
right, require a high percentage of
shareholders to call the meeting.
Because Federal banking statutes or
regulations do not address, directly or
indirectly, the right of shareholders of a
national bank to call special meetings,
these type of State laws are not
inconsistent with Federal law.
Shareholder removal of a director
only for cause. These State provisions
provide, or permit the corporation to
provide in its certificate of
incorporation or other governing
document, that shareholders may
remove a director only for cause, rather
than both for cause and without cause.
The National Bank Act and OCC
regulations do not have a specific
provision addressing director removal
by shareholders. Removal only for cause
is consistent with the OCC’s model
national bank Articles of Association,
112 However, shareholders, including the hostile
acquiror, should consider the implications under
the Change in Bank Control Act or Bank Holding
Company Act if a shareholder, or shareholders
acting in concert, acquire sufficient shares to
constitute ‘‘control.’’
113 See 12 U.S.C. 71, 214a, 215, 215a, and 215a–
2.
114 See 12 U.S.C. 30, 51a, 57, and 59. However,
12 U.S.C. 21a provides that any action requiring
approval of the stockholders be obtained by
approval by a majority vote of the voting shares at
a meeting, unless the statutory provision addressing
the action requires greater level of approval.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
which provide for removal for cause and
for failure to meet statutory director
qualifications.115 Therefore, State
provisions requiring shareholder
removal of a director only for cause are
not inconsistent with Federal law.
Proposed paragraph (c) would set
forth the type of anti-takeover
provisions in State corporate
governance provisions that the OCC has
determined are inconsistent with
Federal banking statutes or regulations.
A national bank could not elect to
follow these provisions. These
provisions are set forth below.
Supermajority voting requirements.
These State statutory provisions require,
or permit the corporation to require in
its certificate of incorporation or other
governing document, that a
supermajority of the shareholders
approve specified matters. A
requirement that a supermajority vote of
shareholders must approve some
transactions is inconsistent with Federal
law when applied to transactions for
which a Federal statute or regulation
includes an express specific shareholder
approval level. Certain provisions of the
National Bank Act specify shareholder
approval by a two-thirds vote 116 and
other provisions require majority
shareholder approval.117 When a
provision in the National Bank Act
specifies the level of shareholder vote
required for approval, it is inconsistent
with Federal law to follow a State
corporate governance provision that
permits or requires a different level or
an additional shareholder approval
requirement for a subset of
shareholders.
Restrictions on a shareholder’s right
to vote all the shares it owns. These
State statutory provisions prohibit, or
permit the corporation in its certificate
of incorporation or other governing
document to prohibit, a person from
voting shares acquired that increase
their percentage of ownership of the
company’s stock above a certain level.
This type of provision is inconsistent
with the National Bank Act, which
expressly provides that each
shareholder is entitled to one vote on
each share of stock held by the
shareholder on all matters other than
elections for directors, where
cumulative voting may be allowed if so
provided in the articles of
association.118 A State corporate
115 See Articles of Association, Charters, and
Bylaw Amendments (Forms), Comptroller’s
Licensing Manual (June 19, 2017) (Model Articles
of Association, Article Fourth, last paragraph).
116 See 12 U.S.C. 30, 57, 59, 181, 214a, 215, 215a,
and 215a–2.
117 See 12 U.S.C. 21a and 51a.
118 12 U.S.C. 61.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40811
governance provision that interferes
with this express right to vote is
inconsistent with Federal law.
As indicated above, § 7.2000(b)
permits a national bank to elect to
follow a State corporate governance
provision only if it is not inconsistent
with Federal law and bank safety and
soundness. Proposed paragraph (d) of
§ 7.2001 addresses the impact of bank
safety and soundness on adoption of
anti-takeover provisions.
Anti-takeover provisions could make
it harder for a bank to be acquired by
another bank or by investors or to raise
capital by discouraging share purchases
by a potential acquiror. Thus, when a
bank is in a weak condition, antitakeover provisions the OCC has
determined are not inconsistent with
Federal law nevertheless would be
inconsistent with bank safety and
soundness if they would impair the
possibility of restoring the bank to
sound condition. These provisions
would then be impermissible.
Accordingly, proposed paragraph (d)
would provide that any State corporate
governance provision, including antitakeover provisions, that would render
more difficult or discourage an injection
of capital by purchase of bank stock, a
merger, the acquisition of the bank, a
tender offer, a proxy contest, the
assumption of control by a holder of a
large block of the bank’s stock, or the
removal of the incumbent board of
directors or management is inconsistent
with bank safety and soundness if: (1)
The bank is less than adequately
capitalized (as defined in 12 CFR part
6); (2) the bank is in troubled condition
(as defined in 12 CFR 5.51(c)(7)); (3)
grounds for the appointment of a
receiver under 12 U.S.C. 191 are
present; or (4) the bank is otherwise in
less than satisfactory condition, as
determined by the OCC.
However, proposed paragraph (d) also
provides that an anti-takeover provision
is not inconsistent with bank safety and
soundness if, at the time it adopts the
provision, the national bank: (1) Is not
subject to any of the foregoing
conditions and (2) includes along with
the provision a limitation that the
provision is not effective if one or more
of the foregoing conditions occur or if
the OCC otherwise directs the bank not
to follow the provision for supervisory
reasons.
Proposed paragraph (e) provides for
OCC case-by-case review of antitakeover provisions. The OCC reviewed
each type of State anti-takeover
provision described in proposed
paragraph (b) for consistency with
Federal banking statutes and regulations
only at a general level, without
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
40812
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
reviewing the specific terms of a
proposed provision to be adopted by a
particular bank. While the OCC has
concluded that the types of provisions
set out in paragraph (b) are not
inconsistent with Federal banking
statutes and regulations in general, the
specific provision a particular bank
adopts may contain features that could
change the result of the OCC’s review.
Similarly, some anti-takeover provisions
may be inconsistent with bank safety
and soundness for a particular national
bank because of its individual
circumstances, even if it is not subject
to the conditions listed in proposed
paragraph (d).
In order to address the need for
individual determinations when
appropriate, proposed paragraph (e)
would provide that the OCC may
determine that a State anti-takeover
provision, as proposed or adopted by an
individual national bank, is: (1)
Inconsistent with Federal banking
statutes or regulations, even if it is of a
type included in paragraph (b) or (2)
inconsistent with bank safety and
soundness other than as provided in
paragraph (d). The OCC could begin a
case-by-case review on its own
initiative. In addition, a bank that
wishes the OCC to review the
permissibility of the specific State antitakeover provisions it has adopted or
proposes to adopt may request the
OCC’s review, under the procedures set
forth at 12 CFR 7.2000(d).
Finally, proposed paragraph (f)
addresses the method a national bank,
its shareholders, and its directors would
use to adopt each anti-takeover
provision. In general, the bank would
follow the requirements for board of
director and shareholder approval set
out in the State corporate governance
statute it is electing to follow. However,
if the provision is included in the bank’s
articles of association, the bank’s
shareholders would be required to
approve the amendment of the articles
pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 21a, even if the
State law does not require approval by
the shareholders. Further, if the State
corporate governance law requires the
provision to be in the company’s articles
of incorporation, certificate of
incorporation, or similar document, the
national bank must include the
provision in its articles of association. If
the State corporate governance law does
not require the provision to be in the
company’s articles of incorporation,
certificate of incorporation, or similar
document but allows it to be in the
bylaws, then the national bank could
include the provision in its articles of
association or in its bylaws. However, if
the State corporate governance law
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
requires shareholder approval for
changes to the corporation’s bylaws,
then the national bank must include the
provision in its articles of association.
Director or Attorney as Proxy (§ 7.2002)
Twelve U.S.C. 61 prohibits an officer,
clerk, teller, or bookkeeper of the bank
from acting as proxy for shareholder
voting. Section 7.2002 codifies this
prohibition in OCC regulations, and
provides that any person or group of
persons, except the bank’s officers,
clerks, tellers, or bookkeepers, may be
designated to act as proxy. The OCC is
proposing to amend this section to
clarify that the proxy referenced in the
section is for shareholder voting, as
provided in the statute. The OCC
intends no substantive change with this
amendment.
President as Director; Senior Executive
Officer (§ 7.2012)
Twelve U.S.C. 76 provides that the
president of the bank must be a member
of the board and be chairman thereof,
but that the board may designate a
director in lieu of the president to be
chairman, who must perform duties as
assigned by the board. Section 7.2012
codifies this statutory requirement in
the OCC’s rules by providing that
pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 76, the president
of a national bank must be a member of
the board of directors, but a director
other than the president may be elected
chairman of the board. This section
further provides that a person other than
the president may serve as the chief
executive officer, and that this person is
not required to be a director of the bank.
When first proposing this rule, the OCC
acknowledged that it was adding this
second sentence to provide that a
person other than the president or a
director may serve as chief executive
officer of a bank.119
The OCC is proposing two substantive
changes to this section. First, the OCC
is proposing that the person serving as,
or in the function of, president of a
national bank, regardless of title, must
be a member of the board of directors.
This change would align the regulation
with the OCC’s view that the bank
officer positions in 12 U.S.C. 76 and
other provisions of the National Bank
Act refer to functions rather than
required titles. If a national bank does
not have an individual serving in the
position of president but does have
another officer serving the function of
president, the individual serving in the
function of president must be a member
of the board of directors. The person
119 60 FR 11924 (March 3, 1995). This rule was
finalized in 1996. 61 FR 4849 (Feb. 9, 1996).
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
serving the function of president is
generally the individual appointed to
oversee the national bank’s day-to-day
activities.120 This change would provide
national banks with flexibility in
employee titles and management
organization. The OCC notes that 12
U.S.C. 24(Fifth) provides national banks
with the authority to set the duties of
their officers. National banks should
ensure that their employee titles do not
create unnecessary confusion.
Second, the OCC is proposing to
remove the provision in § 7.2012 that
states that a person other than the
president may serve as chief executive
officer, and this person is not required
to be a director of the bank. This
provision is unnecessary. The position
of chief executive officer is not
referenced in statute and, as indicated
above, national banks have discretion to
set the duties of their officers. Further,
this provision would conflict with the
first proposed revision. Because
function rather than title would govern
under the proposal, a chief executive
officer that serves the function of
president would be required to be a
member of the board.121
The OCC requests comment on
whether the proposed changes would
provide national banks with flexibility
in their organization of management or
introduce complexity given the current
practices at national banks.
Indemnification of Institution-Affiliated
Parties (§§ 7.2014, 145.121)
The OCC is proposing to amend and
reorganize § 7.2014, Indemnification of
institution-affiliate parties (by national
banks), apply revised § 7.2014 to
Federal savings associations, and
remove § 145.121, Indemnification of
directors, officers and employees (by
Federal savings associations). Twelve
CFR 7.2014 addresses indemnification
of institution-affiliated parties (IAPs) by
national banks in cases involving an
administrative proceeding or civil
action initiated by a Federal banking
agency, as well as cases that do not
involve a Federal banking agency.
Under § 7.2014(a), a national bank only
may make or agree to make
indemnification payments to an IAP
with respect to an administrative
proceeding or civil action initiated by a
Federal banking agency if those
120 See OCC, ‘‘The Director’s Book: Role of
Directors for National Banks and Federal Savings
Associations’’ (July 2016), available at
www.OCC.gov (Director’s Book).
121 The Director’s Book uses the terms
‘‘president’’ and ‘‘chief executive officer’’
interchangeably to refer to the individual appointed
by the board of directors to oversee the day-to-day
activities of a national bank.
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
payments are reasonable and consistent
with the requirements of 12 U.S.C.
1828(k) and the implementing
regulations thereunder. Pursuant to
section 1828(k), the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (FDIC) may
prohibit, by regulation or order, any
indemnification payment made with
regard to an administrative proceeding
or civil action instituted by the
appropriate Federal banking agency that
results in a final order under which the
IAP: (1) Is assessed a civil money
penalty; (2) is removed or prohibited
from participating in conduct of the
affairs of the insured depository
institution; or (3) is required to take
certain affirmative actions in regards to
an insured depository institution.122
Section 1828(k) defines
‘‘indemnification payment’’ to mean any
payment (or any agreement to make any
payment) by any insured depository
institution to pay or reimburse an IAP
for any liability or legal expense with
regard to any administrative proceeding
or civil action instituted by the
appropriate Federal banking agency that
results in a final order under which the
IAP: (1) Is assessed a civil money
penalty; (2) is removed or prohibited
from participating in conduct of the
affairs of the insured depository
institution; or (3) is required to take
certain affirmative actions in regards to
an insured depository institution.123
Section 7.2014(a) defines ‘‘institutionaffiliated party’’ by reference to 12
U.S.C. 1813(u).
Section 7.2014(b)(1) permits a
national bank to indemnify IAPs for
damages and expenses, including the
advancement of legal fees and expenses,
in cases involving an administrative
proceeding or civil action that is not
initiated by a Federal banking agency in
accordance with the law of the State in
which the main office of the bank is
located, the law of the State in which
the bank’s holding company is
122 In prohibiting such payments, the FDIC may
take into account several factors listed in the
statute, such as whether there is a reasonable basis
to believe the IAP has committed fraud, breached
a fiduciary duty, or committed insider abuse; is
substantially responsible for the insolvency of the
depository institution; has violated any Federal or
State banking law or regulation that has had a
material effect on the financial condition of the
institution; or was in a position of managerial or
fiduciary responsibility. See 12 U.S.C. 1828(k)(2).
The FDIC has forbidden certain indemnification
payments by regulation. See 12 CFR 359.1(l)(1)
(definition of ‘‘prohibited indemnification
payment’’); 12 CFR 359.3 (forbidding prohibited
indemnification payments, except as provided in
part 359).
123 See 12 U.S.C. 1828(k)(5)(A); see also 12 U.S.C.
1818(b)(6) (defining affirmative actions that an IAP
may be required to take in regard to insured
depository institutions for purposes of section
1828(k)(5)(A)).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
incorporated, or the relevant provisions
of the Model Business Corporation Act
or Delaware General Corporation Law,
provided such payments are consistent
with safe and sound banking practices.
Additionally, pursuant to
§ 7.2014(b)(2), a national bank may
provide for the payment of reasonable
premiums for insurance covering the
expenses, legal fees, and liability of
IAPs to the extent that these costs could
be indemnified under administrative
proceedings or civil actions not initiated
by a Federal banking agency, as
provided in § 7.2014(b)(1).
Twelve CFR 145.121 addresses
indemnification of directors, officers
and employees by Federal savings
associations. Section 145.121(b) requires
a Federal savings association to
indemnify any person against whom an
action is brought or threatened because
that person is or was a director, officer,
or employee of the association. This
indemnification is subject to the
requirements of § 145.121(c) and (g).
Section 145.121(c) provides that
indemnification only may be made
available to the IAP if there is a final
judgment on the merits in the IAP’s
favor; or, in the case of settlement, final
judgment against the IAP, or final
judgment in the IAP’s favor other than
on the merits, if a majority of the
disinterested directors of the Federal
savings association determine that the
IAP was acting in good faith. It also
provides that the association give the
OCC at least 60 days’ notice of its
intention to indemnify an IAP and
provides that the association may not
indemnify the IAP if the OCC advises
the savings association in writing that
the OCC objects. Section 145.121(g)
makes the indemnification subject to 12
U.S.C. 1821(k).
Pursuant to § 145.121(d), a Federal
savings association may obtain
insurance to protect it and its directors,
officers, and employees from potential
losses arising from claims for acts
committed in their capacity as directors,
officers, or employees. However, a
Federal savings association may not
obtain insurance that provides for
payment of losses incurred as a
consequence of willful or criminal
misconduct.
Pursuant to § 145.121(e), if a majority
of the directors of a Federal savings
association conclude that, in connection
with an action, a person may become
entitled to indemnification, the
directors may authorize payment of
reasonable costs and expenses arising
from the defense or settlement of the
action. Before making advance payment
of expenses, the savings association is
required to obtain an agreement that the
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40813
savings association will be repaid if the
person on whose behalf payment is
made is later determined not to be
entitled to the indemnification.
Pursuant to § 145.121(f), an
association that has a bylaw in effect
relating to indemnification of its
personnel must be governed solely by
that bylaw, except that its authority to
obtain insurance must be governed by
§ 145.121(d), which, as described above,
authorizes the purchase of
indemnification insurance unless the
insurance pays for losses created by
willful or criminal misconduct. Section
145.121(g) states that the
indemnification provided for in
§ 145.121 for Federal savings
associations is subject to and qualified
by 12 U.S.C. 1821(k), which addresses
personal liability for directors and
officers in certain civil actions.
The OCC is proposing to add Federal
savings associations to § 7.2014 so that
both charters would be required to
comply with § 7.2014. Because § 7.2014
applies to IAPs and not only officers,
directors, and employees as does
§ 145.121, the scope of indemnification
rules for Federal savings associations
would be broader, applying also to
certain Federal savings association
controlling shareholders, independent
contractors, consultants, and other
persons identified in 12 U.S.C. 1813(u).
The OCC also is proposing changes to
§ 7.2014. First, the proposal would
amend current § 7.2014(b)(1),
redesignated in this proposal as
§ 7.2014(a) and retitled, to provide that
State law on indemnification may apply
to all administrative proceedings or civil
actions for which an IAP can be
indemnified, not just actions that are
initiated by a person or entity not a
Federal banking agency as under the
current rule. This would clarify the
application of State law on
indemnification to actions initiated by
Federal banking agencies. However,
current § 7.2014(a), redesignated by this
proposal as § 7.2014(b), would still
apply. Specifically, under redesignated
§ 7.2014(b), with respect to proceedings
or civil actions initiated by a Federal
banking agency, a national bank or
Federal savings association only may
make or agree to make indemnification
payments to an IAP that are reasonable
and consistent with the requirements of
section 1828(k) and implementing
regulations thereunder.124
The OCC also is proposing a technical
change to redesignated § 7.2014(a). As
124 The OCC also proposes to move the crossreference to the definition of IAP in redesignated
§ 7.2014(b) to redesignated paragraph (a) and to
make stylistic changes to the wording of
redesignated § 7.2014(b).
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
40814
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
indicated above, the current rule states
that in cases involving an administrative
proceeding or civil action not initiated
by a Federal banking agency, a national
bank may indemnify an IAP in
accordance with the law of the State in
which the main office of the bank is
located, the law of the State in which
the bank’s holding company is
incorporated, or the relevant provisions
of the Model Business Corporation Act
or Delaware General Corporation Law,
provided such payments are consistent
with safe and sound banking practices.
Because these sources of law are
identical to the law a national bank may
elect to follow pursuant to § 7.2000(b) or
the law a Federal savings association
may elect to follow pursuant to §§ 5.21
or 5.22, the OCC proposes to replace the
language on sources of State law in this
provision with a statement that the bank
or savings association may indemnify an
IAP for damages and expenses in
accordance with the law of the State the
bank or savings association has
designated for its corporate governance
under the provisions of §§ 7.2000, 5.21,
or 5.22, as applicable.125
Second, the OCC is proposing to
amend § 7.2014(b)(2), redesignated as
§ 7.2014(d) in the proposal, to allow a
national bank or Federal savings
association to provide for the payment
of reasonable insurance premiums in
connection with all actions involving an
IAP that could be indemnified under
§ 7.2014, whether or not initiated by a
Federal banking agency. The OCC
believes this change would resolve
confusion regarding how current
§ 7.2014(b)(2) is applied. This proposed
change also would better align OCC
regulations on the payment of insurance
premiums with the FDIC’s regulations
and 12 U.S.C. 1828(k).126
Third, the OCC is proposing to add a
new paragraph (c) that would require a
national bank or Federal savings
association, before advancing funds to
an IAP under § 7.2014, to obtain a
written agreement that the IAP will
reimburse the bank for any portion of
indemnification that the IAP is
125 As explained supra, the OCC is proposing to
amend § 7.2000 to also allow national banks to
follow the corporate governance provisions of the
law of any State in which any branch of the bank
is located or where a holding company of the bank
is incorporated even if the holding company is later
eliminated or no longer controls the bank and the
national bank is not located in that State. The OCC
is requesting comment on making the same change
to §§ 5.21 and 5.22.
126 The FDIC’s implementing regulations under
section 1828(k), 12 CFR part 359, explicitly allow
the payment of insurance premiums in anticipation
of actions brought by a Federal banking agency,
provided the insurance is not used to reimburse the
cost of a judgment or civil monetary penalty. See
12 CFR 359.1(l)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
ultimately found not to be entitled to
under 12 U.S.C. 1828(k) and
implementing regulations, except to the
extent the bank’s expenses have been
reimbursed by an insurance policy or
fidelity bond.127 This requirement is
similar to the requirement in
§ 145.121(e) currently applicable to
Federal savings associations and
therefore would not impose any
additional burdens on Federal savings
associations. Further, FDIC
regulations,128 State law,129 and the
Model Business Corporation Act 130
contain similar requirements for IAPs to
reimburse institutions for funds to
which they are later found not to be
entitled. As most national banks are
subject to the FDIC’s indemnification
regulations or have elected under 12
CFR 7.2000(b) to follow State corporate
law imposing reimbursement
requirements for advancement of funds,
the OCC believes that this proposed
change would not impose any
additional burden on national banks
and would merely codify existing
practices. This proposed change also
will ensure that national banks, and
Federal savings associations, do not
provide indemnification to IAPs that is
ultimately in contravention of the
statutory limits of section 1828(k).
The OCC believes that proposed
§ 7.2014 incorporates the provisions of
current § 145.121 that should be
applicable to both national banks and
Federal savings associations, while
maintaining appropriate flexibility for
both types of institutions. Specifically,
the proposal would apply § 7.2014 to
actions brought by a Federal banking
agency and actions not brought by a
Federal banking agency, as in § 145.121,
while retaining the statutory limits of
section 1828(k).131 The proposal also
includes the reimbursement agreement
requirement, as in § 145.121(e).
However, the proposed rule does not
127 National banks are required to purchase
fidelity coverage by 12 CFR 7.2013.
128 See 12 CFR 359.5(a)(4).
129 See, e.g., 8 Del. C. § 145(e); Utah Code § 16–
10a–904; 805 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/8.75(e); see also N.Y.
Bus. Corp. Law § 725(a) (requiring repayment, but
not explicitly requiring a written agreement).
130 See Model Bus. Corp. Act § 8.53(a).
131 Section 145.121(g) subjects and qualifies the
indemnification provided for by current § 145.121
to 12 U.S.C. 1821(k). In contrast, current § 7.2014
explicitly subjects national bank indemnification to
the restrictions of 12 U.S.C. 1828(k). Section
1828(k) directly addresses indemnification and is
applicable to any insured depository institution.
See 12 U.S.C. 1828(k)(5)(A). Section 1821(k)
addresses personal liability for directors and
officers and is also applicable to any insured
depository institution. Both of these statutes apply,
and will continue to apply to national banks and
Federal savings associations but proposed § 7.2014
retains the citation to section 1828(k) as the more
relevant citation for indemnification purposes.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
include the provision in § 145.121 that
requires Federal savings associations to
indemnify persons against whom an
action is brought under certain
circumstances, such as if they are
successful on the merits of the action,
nor 132 the provision requiring a board
vote to authorize indemnification under
certain circumstances.133 In place of
these requirements, proposed § 7.2014
would permit Federal savings
associations to incorporate State law on
indemnification. Because State law
governing indemnification generally
incorporates these aspects of current
§ 145.121, the OCC expects that Federal
savings associations will continue to be
subject to similar provisions governing
indemnification as before. For example,
State law generally requires mandatory
indemnification if an employee is
successful on the merits,134 as well as a
board vote authorizing indemnification
in almost all circumstances.135 Because
national banks also may incorporate
State indemnification law, they would
be subject to these State indemnification
provisions as well. The OCC specifically
requests comment on whether, instead
of relying on State law, the final rule
should include the requirement from
§ 145.121 that, in the case of settlement,
final judgment against the IAP, or final
judgment in the IAP’s favor other than
on the merits, a majority of the
disinterested directors determine that
the IAP was acting in good faith before
the instruction may indemnify the IAP.
The proposed rule also does not
include the provision in § 145.121 that
requires a 60-day prior notice to the
OCC before making an
indemnification.136 The OCC is not
proposing to retain this provision
because it believes it is burdensome and
unnecessary. However, the OCC
requests comment on whether the final
rule should include this prior notice
requirement and, if so, what benefits
prior approval would provide that
would outweigh any additional
regulatory burden.
132 See
§ 145.121(b).
§ 145.121(c)(1)(ii)(C)).
134 See, e.g., 8 Del. C. 145(c); New York BCL
§ 723(a); 805 ILCS 5/8.75(c); Model Bus. Corp. Act,
§ 8.52 (2016).
135 See, e.g., 8 Del. C. 145(d); New York BCL
§ 723(b); 805 ILCS 5/8.75(d); Model Bus. Corp. Act,
§§ 8.53(c), 8.55 (2016).
136 See § 145.121(c)(2)).
133 See
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Restricting Transfer of Stock and Record
Dates; Stock Certificates (§ 7.2016)
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Facsimile Signatures on Bank Stock
Certificates (§ 7.2017)
Lost Stock Certificates (§ 7.2018)
Sections 12 CFR 7.2016, 7.2017, and
7.2018 contain specific requirements
related to national bank stock transfers
and stock certificates. Many of these
requirements are mandated by 12 U.S.C.
52. However, some of these
requirements are outdated because
national banks today rarely issue
physical stock certificates.
Section 7.2016(a) states that, pursuant
section 52, a national bank may impose
conditions on the transfer of its stock
reasonably calculated to simplify the
work of the bank with respect to stock
transfers, voting at shareholders’
meetings, and related matters and to
protect the bank against fraudulent
transfers. Consistent with the statute,
§ 7.2016(b) allows a national bank to
close its stock records for a reasonable
period to ascertain shareholders for
voting purposes. The board also may fix
record dates, which should be
reasonable in proximity to the date
notice is given to shareholders of the
meeting. Section 7.2017 states that the
president and cashier of the bank, or
other officers authorized by the bank’s
bylaws, shall sign each stock certificate.
These signatures may be manual or
facsimile and may be electronic. Each
certificate also must be sealed with the
seal of the bank.
To streamline OCC rules, the OCC is
proposing to combine §§ 7.2016 and
7.2017 into one section, § 7.2016, that
would apply to both stock transfers and
stock certificate requirements. The OCC
also is proposing to make OCC rules on
stock certificates more flexible. As noted
above, section 12 U.S.C. 52 requires
certain officers of the association to sign
every bank stock certificate and for it to
be sealed with the seal of the
association. However, banks now
generally hold stock in ‘‘book-entry’’
form, which is not a format that
supports signatures or stamps. Although
section 52 places requirements on
physical stock certificates, the OCC does
not believe that the language of that
section requires banks to actually issue
stock in certificated form.
Notably, section 52 also states that
‘‘[t]he capital stock of each association
shall be . . . transferable on the books
of the association in such manner as
may be prescribed in the by-laws or
articles of association.’’ 137 This
language allows banks to provide for
book-entry transfer in their by-laws or
137 See
12 U.S.C. 52, first paragraph.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
articles of association, even if this type
of transfer is incompatible with the use
of signatures and seals. Therefore, the
OCC is proposing to state that a national
bank may prescribe the manner in
which its stock shall be transferred in its
by-laws or articles of association. The
OCC also is proposing to specify that a
national bank that does issue stock in
certificate form must comply with the
requirements of section 52, including:
(1) The name and location of the bank;
(2) name and holder of record of the
stock; (3) the number and class of shares
which the certificate represents; (4) if
the bank issues more than one class of
stock, the respective rights, preferences,
privileges, voting rights, powers,
restrictions, limitations, and
qualifications of each class of stock
issued (unless incorporated by reference
to the articles of association); (5)
signatures of the president and cashier
of the bank, or such other officers as the
bylaws of the bank provide; and (6) the
seal of the bank. The OCC is proposing
to continue allowing banks to meet the
signature requirements of section 52
through the use of electronic means or
by facsimiles, as is permitted by current
§ 7.2017.
Finally, the OCC is proposing to
remove § 7.2018 as unnecessary. Section
7.2018 states that if the bank’s articles
of association or bylaws do not provide
for replacing lost, stolen, or destroyed
stock certificates, the bank may adopt
procedures under 12 CFR 7.2000.
Section 7.2000 generally permits
national banks to adopt corporate
governance procedures 138 in
accordance with State law, to the extent
not inconsistent with applicable Federal
laws and regulations or with bank safety
and soundness. Therefore, this
provision is unnecessary.
Acquisition and Holding of Shares as
Treasury Stock (§ 7.2020)
The OCC is proposing to remove 12
CFR 7.2020. Currently, § 7.2020
provides that a national bank may
repurchase its outstanding shares and
hold them as treasury stock as a capital
reduction under 12 U.S.C. 59 if the
repurchase and retention is for a
‘‘legitimate corporate purpose’’ and not
for speculative purposes. The OCC
issued § 7.2020 in 1996 as an exception
to the provision in 12 U.S.C. 83 that
prohibited a national bank from being
the ‘‘purchaser or holder’’ of its own
shares. However, in 2000, Congress
amended section 83 to remove this
138 The proposed rule would change this
terminology in § 7.2000 to ‘‘corporate governance
provisions.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40815
prohibition.139 Therefore, § 7.2020 is
unnecessary. The OCC notes that
removing § 7.2020 would not limit the
OCC’s authority over share repurchases.
Share repurchases are considered
reductions in capital and would
continue to be subject to OCC and
shareholder approval under 12 U.S.C.
59 and 12 CFR 5.46.
Capital Stock-Related Activities of a
National Bank (New § 7.2025)
The OCC is proposing a new section,
§ 7.2025, that would codify various OCC
interpretations of the National Bank Act
involving capital stock issuances and
repurchases. Specifically, proposed
§ 7.2025 would explain the shareholder
approval requirements for the issuance
of authorized common stock; the
issuance, repurchase, and redemption of
preferred stock pursuant to blank check
procedures; and share repurchase
programs. Generally, an increase or
decrease in the amount of a national
bank’s common or preferred stock is a
change in permanent capital subject to
the notice and approval requirements of
12 CFR 5.46 and applicable law.140
Proposed § 7.2025(a) sets forth the
general requirements for changes in
permanent capital. Paragraphs (b)
through (d) of proposed § 7.2025
provide more specific requirements for
shareholder approval of various types of
issuances and repurchases. Section
7.2025(e) would identify certain
permissible features for preferred stock.
Issuance of previously approved and
authorized common stock. The issuance
of common stock is governed by 12
U.S.C. 57, which provides that a
national bank ‘‘may, with the approval
of the [OCC], and by a vote of
shareholders owning two-thirds of the
stock of such [bank], increase its capital
stock to any sum.’’ The OCC has
interpreted 12 U.S.C. 57 to require a
two-thirds shareholder vote to amend
the articles of association to increase the
number of authorized shares.141 The
OCC also has long interpreted section 57
to permit a national bank’s board of
directors to issue common stock without
obtaining additional shareholder
approval at the time of the issuance so
long as the issuance does not exceed the
amount of common stock previously
139 Public Law 106–569, Title XII, section 1207(a),
114 Stat. 3034 (American Homeownership and
Economic Opportunity Act of 2000).
140 See generally 12 U.S.C. 51a, (preferred stock
issuance), 57 (increase in capital), and 59 (reduction
of capital).
141 See, e.g., Articles of Association, Charter, and
Bylaw Amendments, Comptroller’s Licensing
Manual (June 2017), p. 3 (indicating that two-thirds
of a national bank’s shareholders must vote to
increase or decrease the authorized number of
common shares in the articles of association).
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
40816
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
approved and authorized by
shareholders.142 Proposed 7.2025(b)
would codify this interpretation.
Specifically, paragraph (b) would
provide that, in compliance with 12
U.S.C. 57, a national bank may issue
common stock up to an amount
previously approved and authorized in
the national bank’s articles of
association by holders of two-thirds of
the national bank’s shares without
obtaining additional shareholder
approval for each subsequent issuance
within the authorized amount.
Issuance, repurchase, and redemption
of preferred stock pursuant to certain
procedures. Twelve U.S.C. 51a requires
a majority of shareholders vote to
approve a national bank’s issuance of
preferred stock. However, the statute
does not specify when in the process the
bank must obtain shareholder approval.
In OCC Interpretive Letter 921, the OCC
determined that a national bank could
adopt, subject to required shareholder
approval, a provision in its articles of
association or an amendment to its
articles authorizing the bank’s board of
directors to issue preferred stock using
blank check procedures (‘‘blank check
preferred stock’’).143 Blank check
preferred stock refers to preferred stock
for which the board is empowered to
issue and determine the terms of
authorized and unissued preferred
stock. To be permissible, blank check
preferred stock must be permitted by the
corporate governance procedures
adopted by the bank under § 7.2000.144
The OCC also determined that
shareholders’ adoption or approval of a
blank check preferred stock article
constitutes the shareholder action
required by 12 U.S.C. 51a and 51b to
issue and establish the terms of
preferred stock. The subsequent
issuance of the preferred stock within
the authorized limits would not require
additional shareholder approval.
Interpretive Letter 921 did not
specifically address blank check
preferred procedures that include the
authority, and the shareholder action
required, to repurchase and redeem
blank check preferred stock.
The redemption or repurchase of
preferred stock is a reduction in capital.
142 A previous version of § 5.46 (1981) provided
that shareholder approval would not be required to
increase common stock through the issuance of a
class of common up to an amount previously
approved by shareholders. Subsequent amendments
to § 5.46, which the OCC intended to simplify 12
CFR part 5, omitted this language but did not
change this interpretation.
143 OCC Interpretive Letter No. 921 (Dec. 13,
2001).
144 The proposed rule would change this
terminology in § 7.2000 to ‘‘corporate governance
provisions.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
Twelve U.S.C. 59 requires the approval
of two-thirds of shareholders for a
national bank to reduce capital, but it
does not specify when in the process the
bank must obtain shareholder approval.
In Interpretive Letter 1162, the OCC
determined that the holders of twothirds of a national bank’s shares may
approve in advance redemptions of
blank check preferred stock by voting to
amend the articles of association to
authorize the issuance and redemption
of blank check preferred shares.145
Proposed § 7.2025(c) would codify
these interpretations and permit blank
check procedures, if approved in
advance by the bank’s shareholders, that
authorize the issuance, repurchase, and
redemption of preferred stock without
additional shareholder approval at the
time of issuance, repurchase, or
redemption, if certain conditions are
met. Proposed paragraph (c) would
provide that, subject to the requirements
of 12 U.S.C. 51a, 51b, and 59, a national
bank may adopt procedures to authorize
the board of directors to issue,
determine the terms of, repurchase, or
redeem one or more series of preferred
stock, if permitted by the corporate
governance provisions adopted by the
bank under 12 CFR 7.2000. This
proposed provision further provides
that, to satisfy the shareholder approval
requirements of 12 U.S.C. 51a and 59,
shareholders must approve the adoption
of these procedures in advance through
an amendment to the national bank’s
articles of association, and that any
amendment that authorizes both the
issuance and the repurchase and
redemption of shares must be approved
by holders of two-thirds of the national
bank’s shares.
Share repurchase programs. In
Interpretive Letter 1162, the OCC
determined that the shareholder
approval requirement in 12 U.S.C. 59
may be satisfied by a two-thirds
shareholder vote approving an
amendment to the bank’s articles of
association authorizing the board of
directors to implement share repurchase
programs. A share repurchase program
authorizes the board of directors to
repurchase the national bank’s common
or preferred stock from time to time
under board-determined parameters that
can limit the frequency, type, aggregate
limit, or purchase price of repurchases,
without obtaining additional
shareholder approval at the time the
shares are repurchased. Proposed
§ 7.2025(d) would codify this
interpretation by providing that, subject
to the requirements of 12 U.S.C. 59, a
145 OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1162 (July 6,
2018).
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
national bank may establish a program
for the repurchase, from time to time, of
the national bank’s common or
preferred stock, if permitted by the
corporate governance provisions
adopted by the bank under 12 CFR
7.2000. Proposed paragraph (d) also
provides that, to satisfy the shareholder
approval requirement of 12 U.S.C. 59,
the repurchase program must be
approved in advance by the holders of
two-thirds of the national bank’s shares,
including through an amendment to the
national bank’s articles of association
that authorizes the board of directors to
implement share repurchase programs
from time to time under boarddetermined parameters that can limit
the frequency, type, aggregate limit, or
purchase price of repurchases.
Preferred stock features. Proposed
§ 7.2025(e) would clarify that a national
bank may issue and maintain
noncumulative preferred stock under 12
U.S.C. 51b. This provision would codify
a longstanding OCC interpretation that
section 51b, by its terms, describes
limitations on the portion of the
preferred stock dividend which may be
cumulative. It does not require that
preferred stock dividends must always
be cumulative.146 Specifically, proposed
§ 7.2025(e) would provide that a
national bank’s preferred stock may be
cumulative or non-cumulative and may
or may not have voting rights on one or
more series.
Subpart C— National Bank and Federal
Savings Association Operations
National Bank and Federal Savings
Association Hours and Closings
(§ 7.3000)
The OCC is proposing to amend
§ 7.3000, National bank hours and
closings, to include Federal savings
associations, to update it, and to make
technical and clarifying changes.
Twelve U.S.C. 95(b)(1) specifically
authorizes the Comptroller to designate
a legal holiday because of emergency
conditions occurring in any State or part
of a State for national banks located in
that State or affected area. Section
95(b)(1) also provides that when a State
or State official authorized by law
designates any day as a legal holiday for
146 In part, section 51b provides that preferred
shareholders ‘‘shall be entitled to receive such
cumulative dividends . . . as may be provided in
the articles of association . . . and no dividends
shall be declared or paid on common stock until
cumulative dividends on preferred stock have been
paid in full. . . . ’’ The OCC has previously
interpreted section 51a as providing national banks
with broad authority to issue preferred stock,
including preferred stock bearing noncumulative
dividends, notwithstanding the language of section
51b. See OCC Letter from Martin Goodman, OCC
Assoc. Ch. Couns. (Oct. 3, 1977).
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
ceremonial or emergency reasons, that
day is a legal holiday and a national
bank located in that State or affected
part of the State may close or remain
open unless the Comptroller directs
otherwise by written order.
The OCC has implemented this
statutory provision in 12 CFR 7.3000.
Specifically, § 7.3000(b) provides that
when the Comptroller, a State, or a
legally authorized State official declares
a day a legal holiday due to emergency
conditions, a national bank may
temporarily limit or suspend its
operations at its affected offices.
Alternatively, the bank may continue its
operations, unless the Comptroller
directs otherwise by written order. This
rule provides that emergency conditions
include natural disasters and civil and
municipal emergencies, such as severe
flooding or a power emergency declared
by a local power company or
government requesting that businesses
in the affected area close. Section
7.3000(c) states that a State or a legally
authorized State official may declare a
day a legal holiday for ceremonial
reasons and provides that when a State
legal holiday is declared for ceremonial
reasons, a national bank may choose to
remain open or to close. Section
7.3000(d) provides that a national bank
should assure that all liabilities or other
obligations under the applicable law
due to the bank’s closing are satisfied,
e.g., notice to depositors about funds
availability pursuant to 12 CFR
229.13(g)(4).
There is no equivalent statute or
corresponding regulation for Federal
savings associations. However, a former
OTS regulation at 12 CFR 510.2(b)
permitted the OTS to waive or relax any
limitations pertaining to the operations
of a Federal savings associations in any
area affected by a determination by the
President of the United States that a
major disaster or emergency had
occurred. Amending § 7.300 to include
Federal savings associations would
clarify for these institutions how a legal
holiday is declared and the implications
of a legal holiday declaration, as well as
provide consistency between national
bank and Federal savings association
operations on legal holidays. We note
that the Comptroller is directed under
section 4 of the HOLA (12 U.S.C.
1463(a)(1)(A)) to provide for the ‘‘safe
and sound operation’’ of Federal savings
associations.147 The OTS relied on this
HOLA authority when it issued
147 See also 12 U.S.C. 1(a) (charging the OCC with
assuring the safety and soundness of institutions
subject to its jurisdiction).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
§ 510.2(b) 148 and this proposed rule
furthers that objective.
The OCC also is proposing a number
of changes to clarify and update the
emergency closing provisions of
§ 7.3000. First, the OCC is proposing to
clarify that § 7.3000 also applies to
Federal branches and agencies of foreign
banks. Although current § 7.3000
applies to Federal branches and
agencies pursuant to section 4(b) of the
International Banking Act, 12 U.S.C.
3102(b), the OCC believes it is
appropriate to specify this application
in the rule.149
Second, the proposal would provide
that the Comptroller may declare ‘‘any
day’’ a legal holiday, instead of ‘‘a day,’’
to more accurately reflect the statutory
language and to clarify that the
Comptroller may declare more than one
day due to the emergency condition as
a legal holiday.
Third, the proposed rule would
amend § 7.3000(b) to state that
emergency conditions could be ‘‘caused
by acts of nature or of man.’’ This
amendment mirrors the language in 12
U.S.C. 95(b)(1) and would clarify the
broad scope of possible emergency
conditions that could justify a legal
holiday.
Fourth, the proposal updates the
types of emergency conditions listed in
the rule to include disasters other than
natural disasters, public health or safety
emergencies, and cyber threats or other
unauthorized intrusions, and updates
the list of examples to include
pandemics, terrorist attacks, and cyberattacks on bank systems.
Fifth, the proposal provides that the
Comptroller may issue a declaration of
a legal holiday in anticipation of the
emergency condition, in addition to at
the time of the emergency or soon
thereafter. This codifies the current
practice of the Comptroller in most
cases, which permits national banks,
Federal savings associations, and
Federal branches and agencies to better
plan for the possible closing.
Sixth, the proposal provides that in
the absence of a Comptroller declaration
of a bank holiday, a national bank,
Federal savings associations, or Federal
branch or agency may choose to
temporarily close offices in response to
54 FR 49411, at 49456 (Nov. 30, 1989).
indicated previously in this preamble,
section 4(b) of the International Banking Act, 12
U.S.C. 3102(b), provides that the operations of a
foreign bank at a Federal branch or agency shall be
conducted with the same rights and privileges as a
national bank at the same location and shall be
subject to all the same duties, restrictions, penalties,
liabilities, conditions, and limitations that would
apply under the National Bank Act to a national
bank doing business at the same location. See also
12 CFR 28.13.
PO 00000
148 See
149 As
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40817
an emergency condition. The bank,
savings associations, or branch or
agency would need to notify the OCC of
such temporary closure as soon as
feasible. This provision would provide
additional flexibility to OCC-regulated
institutions during emergency
conditions and would codify similar
language currently included in the
OCC’s Licensing Manual.150
Seventh, the proposal clarifies in
§ 7.3000(c) that a State legal holiday
may be for the entire State or part of the
State, as indicated in 12 U.S.C. 95(b)(1).
Eighth, as provided in the statute, the
proposal provides in § 7.3000(c) that the
Comptroller may by written order direct
the affected institution to close or
remain open during a State legal holiday
declared for ceremonial reasons, as with
a State legal holiday declared due to an
emergency.
Finally, the proposed rule adds a new
paragraph, § 7.3000(e), to provide a
definition of ‘‘State’’ that is consistent
with the definition in 12 U.S.C. 95(b)(2).
In addition, the OCC is proposing a
number of technical changes to § 7.3000.
The proposal would replace the word
‘‘country’’ with ‘‘United States’’ in the
phrase describing affected geographic
area to make this phrase more precise;
delete the superfluous citation to 12
U.S.C. 95 in § 7.3000(b); and delete the
superfluous first sentence of current
§ 7.3000(c), which states that a State or
a legally authorized State official may
declare a day a legal holiday for
ceremonial reasons.
In proposing these changes, the OCC
is reorganizing § 7.3000(b) and (c) so
that all provisions relating to
Comptroller declared legal holidays for
emergency conditions are in § 7.3000(b)
and all provisions related to State
declared legal holidays for emergency
and ceremonial reasons are in
§ 7.3000(c). This reorganization more
clearly sets forth the standards for
Comptroller and State declared legal
holidays and corresponds better with
the statutory text.
Section 7.3000 also provides, in
paragraph (a), that a national bank’s
board of directors should review its
banking hours and, independently of
any other bank, take appropriate actions
to establishing a schedule of its banking
hours. The OCC is proposing to update
this provision by replacing ‘‘banking
hours’’ with ‘‘hours of operations for
customers.’’ Furthermore, the OCC is
proposing to include Federal savings
associations and Federal branches and
agencies in this provision. Because
Federal branches and agencies typically
150 See Comptroller’s Licensing Manual, Branch
Closings (June 2017).
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
40818
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
do not have a board of directors,
proposed § 7.3000(a) would provide that
an equivalent person or committee for a
Federal branch or agency should review
that entity’s operating hours and take
appropriate action to establish a
schedule of operating hours for
customers.
Sharing National Bank or Federal
Savings Association Space and
Employees (§ 7.3001)
Section 7.3001 permits national banks
and Federal savings associations to lease
excess space on bank or savings
association premises to other
businesses, share space jointly held
with other businesses, offer its services
in space owned by or leased to other
businesses, and share employees when
sharing space. The OCC proposes to add
a cross-reference to redesignated
§ 7.1024, National bank or Federal
savings association ownership of
property, in § 7.3001(a)(1) to clarify that
the requirements of § 7.1024 apply to
the sharing of office space and
employees pursuant to § 7.3001.
General Technical Changes
In addition to the technical changes
discussed above, the OCC proposes
numerous technical changes throughout
12 CFR part 7. Specifically, the
proposed rule would:
• Replace the word ‘‘shall’’ with
‘‘must,’’ ‘‘will,’’ or other appropriate
language, which is the more current rule
writing convention for imposing an
obligation and is the recommended
drafting style of the Federal Register;
• Uniformly capitalize the words
‘‘State’’ and ‘‘Federal’’ in conformance
with Federal Register drafting style;
• Replace the term ‘‘bank’’ and
‘‘savings association’’ with ‘‘national
bank’’ or ‘‘Federal savings association,’’
respectively, where appropriate;
• Clarify punctuation and update or
conform spelling of various terms; and
• Conform paragraph heading style.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
III. Request for Comments
The OCC requests comment on any
aspect of this proposal, in addition to
those specific requests noted in the
SUPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Further, the
COVID 19 emergency has required
banks in many cases to consider
changes to the way they do business and
may potentially result in longer term
changes in industry practices. The OCC
requests comment on whether it should
consider other amendments to part 7 to
address issues that may have arisen due
to the COVID–19 pandemic. If so, please
provide suggestions for specific
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
amendments and not general requests
for changes.151
IV. Regulatory Analyses
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
Certain provisions of the proposed
rulemaking contain ‘‘collection of
information’’ requirements within the
meaning of the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3521). In accordance with the
requirements of the PRA, the OCC may
not conduct or sponsor, and a
respondent is not required to respond
to, an information collection unless it
displays a currently valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number.
The OCC reviewed the proposed
rulemaking and determined that it
revises certain information collection
requirements previously cleared by
OMB under OMB Control No. 1557–
0204. The OCC has submitted the
revised information collection to OMB
for review under section 3507(d) of the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) and section
1320.11 of the OMB’s implementing
regulations (5 CFR 1320).
Current Actions
The information collection
requirements are as follows:
• Tax Equity Finance Transactions—
Written requests are required to increase
the aggregate limit on tax equity finance
transactions. Prior written notification
to OCC is required for each tax equity
finance transaction. § 7.1025.
• Payment Systems—Thirty (30) days
advance written notice is required
before joining a payment system that
would expose the institution to openend liability. An after-the-fact written
notice must be filed within 30 days of
becoming a member of a payment
system that does not expose the
institution to open-end liabilities with
certain representations. Both notices
must include safety and soundness
representations. § 7.1026.
• Derivatives Activities—Thirty (30)
days prior written notice is required
before engaging in certain derivatives
hedging activities, expanding
derivatives hedging activities to include
a new category of underlying, engaging
in certain customer-driven financial
intermediation derivatives activities,
and expanding customer-driven
151 As indicated previously in this Supplementary
Information section, the OCC has issued an interim
final rule that amends 12 CFR 7.1001 and 7.1003
to provide for remote participation at shareholder
and board of director meetings to allow national
banks to hold these meetings without violating
social distancing restrictions imposed in response
to the COVID–19 emergency. See 85 FR 31943 (May
28, 2020).
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
financial intermediation derivatives
activities to include a new category of
underlying. § 7.1030.
• State Corporate Governance—
Requests for OCC’s staff position on the
ability of national bank to engage in
particular State corporate governance
provision must include name, citations,
discussion of similarly suited State
banks, identification of Federal banking
statutes and regulations, and analysis of
consistency with statutes, regulations,
and safety and soundness. § 7.2000.
• Indemnification of institutionaffiliated parties—Administrative
proceeding or civil actions not initiated
by a Federal banking agency—A written
agreement that an IAP will reimburse
the institution for any portion of nonreimbursed indemnification that the IAP
is found not entitled to is required
before advancing funds to an IAP.
Federal savings associations no longer
required to provide OCC prior notice of
indemnification. § 7.2014.
• Issuing Stock in Certificate Form—
National banks must include certain
information, signatures and seal when
issuing stock in certificate form.
§ 7.2016.
Title of Information Collection: Bank
Activities and Operations.
Frequency: Event generated.
Affected Public: Businesses or other
for-profit.
Estimated number of respondents:
213.
Total estimated annual burden: 586
hours.
Comments are invited on:
a. Whether the collections of
information are necessary for the proper
performance of the agencies’ functions,
including whether the information has
practical utility;
b. The accuracy or the estimate of the
burden of the information collections,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
c. Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected;
d. Ways to minimize the burden of the
information collections on respondents,
including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; and
e. Estimates of capital or startup costs
and costs of operation, maintenance,
and purchase of services to provide
information.
All comments will become a matter of
public record. Comments on aspects of
this notice that may affect reporting,
recordkeeping, or disclosure
requirements and burden estimates
should be sent to the addresses listed in
the ADDRESSES section of this document.
Written comments and
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
recommendations for the information
collection should be sent within 60 days
of publication of this notice of proposed
rulemaking to www.reginfo.gov/public/
do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting
‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open
for Public Comments’’ or by using the
search function.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
In general, the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
an agency, in connection with a
proposed rule, to prepare an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
describing the impact of the rule on
small entities (defined by the Small
Business Administration for purposes of
the RFA to include commercial banks
and savings institutions with total assets
of $600 million or less and trust
companies with total assets of $41.5
million of less). However, under section
605(b) of the RFA, this analysis is not
required if an agency certifies that the
rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities and publishes
its certification and a short explanatory
statement in the Federal Register along
with its rule.
The OCC currently supervises
approximately 1,185 institutions
(commercial banks, trust companies,
Federal savings associations, and
branches or agencies of foreign banks,
collectively banks), of which 782 are
small entities.152 Because the rule
applies to all OCC-supervised
depository institutions, the proposed
rule would affect all small OCCsupervised entities and thus, a
substantial number of them. However,
almost all of the provisions in the final
rule clarify or codify existing
requirements, loosen existing
requirements, increase flexibility, or
reduce burden. One provision in the
proposed rule, § 7.2012, which would
require a bank president to be a member
of the bank’s board of directors, could
impose a new requirement on banks
subject to the prior notice requirement
for any change in directors pursuant to
12 CFR 5.51. However, the number of
banks that are subject to this prior
notice requirement that do not currently
have a president serving on the board of
152 Consistent with the General Principles of
Affiliation 13 CFR 121.103(a), the OCC counts the
assets of affiliated financial institutions when
determining if it should classify an institution as a
small entity. The OCC used December 31, 2018, to
determine size because a ‘‘financial institution’s
assets are determined by averaging the assets
reported on its four quarterly financial statements
for the preceding year.’’ See footnote 8 of the U.S.
Small Business Administration’s Table of Size
Standards.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
directors is limited. As a result, the
proposed rule, if implemented, would
not impose new mandates on more than
a limited number of banks. Therefore,
the OCC believes the costs associated
with the proposed rule, if any, would be
minimal and thus the proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on any small OCC-supervised
entities. For these reasons, the OCC
certifies that, if adopted, the proposed
rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities supervised by
the OCC. Accordingly, an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not
required.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
The OCC has analyzed the proposed
rule under the factors in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA),
2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. Under this analysis
the OCC considered whether the
proposed 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 ($154 million as
adjusted annually for inflation). The
UMRA does not apply to regulations
that incorporate requirements
specifically set forth in law.
As discussed above, the proposed
rule, if implemented, would not impose
new mandates on more than a limited
number of banks. Therefore, the OCC
concludes that if implemented, the
proposed rule would not result in an
expenditure of $154 million or more
annually by State, local, and tribal
governments, or by the private sector.
Therefore, the OCC finds that the
proposed rule does not trigger the
UMRA cost threshold. Accordingly, the
OCC has not prepared the written
statement described in section 202 of
the UMRA.
E. Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994
Pursuant to section 302(a) of the
Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994
(RCDRIA), 12 U.S.C. 4802(a), in
determining the effective date and
administrative compliance requirements
for new regulations that impose
additional reporting, disclosure, or other
requirements on insured depository
institutions, the OCC will consider,
consistent with principles of safety and
soundness and the public interest: (1)
Any administrative burdens that the
proposed rule would place on
depository institutions, including small
depository institutions and customers of
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40819
depository institutions; and (2) the
benefits of the proposed rule. The OCC
requests comment on any administrative
burdens that the proposed rule would
place on depository institutions,
including small depository institutions,
and their customers, and the benefits of
the proposed rule that the OCC should
consider in determining the effective
date and administrative compliance
requirements for a final rule.
List of Subjects
12 CFR Part 7
Computer technology, Credit,
Derivatives, Federal savings
associations, Insurance, Investments,
Metals, National banks, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Securities,
Security bonds
12 CFR Part 145
Electronic funds transfers, Public
deposits, Federal savings associations
12 CFR Part 160
Consumer protection, Investments,
Manufactured homes, Mortgages,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Savings associations,
Securities.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the OCC proposes to amend
12 CFR chapter I as follows:
PART 7—ACTIVITIES AND
OPERATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 7 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1 et seq., 25b, 29, 71,
71a, 92, 92a, 93, 93a, 95(b)(1), 371, 371d, 481,
484, 1463, 1464, 1465, 1818, 1828(m),
3102(b), and 5412(b)(2)(B).
§ 7.1000
■
■
[Redesignated]
2. Redesignate § 7.1000 as § 7.1024.
3. Add § 7.1000 to read as follows:
§ 7.1000 Activities that are part of, or
incidental to, the business of banking.
(a) Purpose. This section identifies the
criteria that the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) uses
to determine whether an activity is
authorized as part of, or incidental to,
the business of banking under 12 U.S.C.
24(Seventh) or other statutory authority.
(b) Restrictions and conditions on
activities. The OCC may determine that
activities are permissible under 12
U.S.C. 24(Seventh) or other statutory
authority only if they are subject to
standards or conditions designed to
provide that the activities function as
intended and are conducted safely and
soundly, in accordance with other
applicable statutes, regulations, or
supervisory policies.
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
40820
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(c) Activities that are part of the
business of banking.
(1) An activity is permissible for
national banks as part of the business of
banking if the activity is authorized
under 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) or other
statutory authority. In determining
whether an activity that is not
specifically included in 12 U.S.C.
24(Seventh) or other statutory authority
is part of the business of banking, the
OCC considers the following factors:
(i) Whether the activity is the
functional equivalent to, or a logical
outgrowth of, a recognized banking
activity;
(ii) Whether the activity strengthens
the bank by benefiting its customers or
its business;
(iii) Whether the activity involves
risks similar in nature to those already
assumed by banks; and
(iv) Whether the activity is authorized
for State-chartered banks.
(2) The weight accorded each factor
set out in paragraph (c)(1) of this section
depends on the facts and circumstances
of each case.
(d) Activities that are incidental to the
business of banking.
(1) An activity is authorized for a
national bank as incidental to the
business of banking if it is convenient
or useful to an activity that is
specifically authorized for national
banks or to an activity that is otherwise
part of the business of banking. In
determining whether an activity is
convenient or useful to such activities,
the OCC considers the following factors:
(i) Whether the activity facilitates the
production or delivery of a bank’s
products or services, enhances the
bank’s ability to sell or market its
products or services, or improves the
effectiveness or efficiency of the bank’s
operations, in light of risks presented,
innovations, strategies, techniques and
new technologies for producing and
delivering financial products and
services; and
(ii) Whether the activity enables the
bank to use capacity acquired for its
banking operations or otherwise avoid
economic loss or waste.
(2) The weight accorded each factor
set out in paragraph (d)(1) of this section
depends on the facts and circumstances
of each case.
■ 4. Amend § 7.1002 by:
■ a. Revising the heading in paragraph
(a);
■ b. In paragraph (b)(6), removing the
word ‘‘and’’;
■ c. In paragraph (b)(7)(ii), removing the
period after ‘‘specific transaction’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘; and’’; and
d. Adding paragraph (b)(8).
The revision and addition reads as
follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
§ 7.1002
National bank acting as finder.
(a) In general. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(8) Acting as an electronic finder
pursuant to § 7.5002(a)(1).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Amend § 7.1003 by:
■ a. Revising the section heading;
■ b. Revising the paragraph heading in
paragraph (a); and
■ c. Adding paragraph (c).
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
§ 7.1003 Money lent at banking offices or
at facilities other than banking offices.
(a) In general. * * *
*
*
*
*
(c) Services on equivalent terms to
those offered customers of unrelated
banks. An operating subsidiary owned
by a national bank may distribute loan
proceeds from its own funds or bank
funds directly to the borrower in person
at offices the operating subsidiary has
established without violating 12 U.S.C.
36, 12 U.S.C. 81 and 12 CFR 5.30,
provided that the operating subsidiary
provides similar services on
substantially similar terms and
conditions to customers of unaffiliated
entities including unaffiliated banks.
■ 6. Revise 7.1004 to read as follows:
*
§ 7.1004 Establishment of a loan
production office by a national bank.
(a) In general. A national bank or its
operating subsidiary may engage in loan
production activities at a site other than
the main office or a branch of the bank.
A national bank or its operating
subsidiary may solicit loan customers,
market loan products, assist persons in
completing application forms and
related documents to obtain a loan,
originate and approve loans, make
credit decisions regarding a loan
application, and offer other lendingrelated services such as loan
information and applications at a loan
production office without violating 12
U.S.C. 36 and 12 U.S.C. 81, provided
that ‘‘money’’ is not deemed to be ‘‘lent’’
at that site within the meaning of
§ 7.1003 and the site does not accept
deposits or pay withdrawals.
(b) Services of other persons. A
national bank may use the services of,
and compensate, persons not employed
by the bank in its loan production
activities.
§ 7.1005
■
[Removed and Reserved]
7. Remove and reserve § 7.1005.
§ 7.1006
[Amended]
8. Amend § 7.1006 by:
a. Revising the section heading by
removing the words ‘‘national bank’’;
■
■
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
b. Adding the words ‘‘or Federal
savings association’’ after the words
‘‘national bank’’ wherever it appears in
the first and second sentences; and
■ c. Adding the words ‘‘or savings
association’’ after the words ‘‘provided
that the bank’’ in the second sentence.
■
§ 7.1009
■
■
[Removed and Reserved]
9. Remove and reserve § 7.1009.
10. Revise § 7.1010 to read as follows:
§ 7.1010 Postal services by national banks
and Federal savings associations.
(a) In general. A national bank or
Federal savings association may provide
postal services and receive income from
those services. The services performed
are those permitted under applicable
rules of the United States Postal Service.
These may include meter stamping of
letters and packages and the sale of
related insurance. The national bank or
Federal savings association may
advertise, develop, and extend the
services to attract customers to the
institution.
(b) Postal regulations. A national bank
or Federal savings association providing
postal services must do so in accordance
with the rules and regulations of the
United States Postal Service. The
national bank or Federal savings
association must keep the books and
records of the postal services separate
from those of other banking operations.
Under 39 U.S.C. 404 and any
regulations issued under that statute,
the United States Postal Service may
inspect the books and records pertaining
to the postal services.
§ 7.1012
[Amended]
11. Amend § 7.1012 by:
a. In paragraph (c)(1), removing the
words ‘‘pick up from, and deliver’’ and
adding in its place the words ‘‘pick up
from and deliver’’; and
■ b. In paragraph (c)(2)(vi), removing
the words ‘‘back office’’ and adding in
its place the words ‘‘back-office’’.
■ 12. Revise § 7.1015 to read as follows:
■
■
§ 7.1015 National bank and Federal
savings association investments in small
business investment companies.
(a) National banks. A national bank
may invest in a small business
investment company (SBIC) or in any
entity established solely to invest in
SBICs, including purchasing the stock of
a SBIC, subject to appropriate capital
limitations (see e.g., 15 U.S.C. 682(b)),
and may receive the benefits of such
stock ownership (e.g., stock dividends).
The receipt and retention of a dividend
by a national bank from a SBIC in the
form of stock of a corporate borrower of
the SBIC is not a purchase of stock
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
within the meaning of 12 U.S.C.
24(Seventh).
(b) Federal savings associations.
Federal savings associations may invest
in a SBIC or in any entity established
solely to invest in SBICs as provided in
12 CFR 160.30.
(c) Qualifying SBIC. A national bank
or Federal savings association may
invest in a SBIC that is either (1) already
organized and has obtained a license
from the Small Business
Administration, or (2) in the process of
being organized.
■ 13. Amend § 7.1016 by:
■ a. Revising the section heading;
■ b. Revising paragraph (a);
■ c. In paragraph (b)(1) introductory
text, removing the word ‘‘banks’’
wherever it appears and adding in its
place the words ‘‘national banks and
Federal savings associations’’;
■ d. Revising paragraph (b)(1)(iv);
■ e. In paragraph (b)(2)(ii), removing the
word ‘‘bank’s’’ and adding in its place
the words ‘‘national bank’s or Federal
savings association’s’’;
■ f. In paragraphs (b)(1)(iii)(B),
(1)(iii)(C), (2)(i), (2)(iii), (3), and (4),
removing the word ‘‘bank’’ and adding
in its place the words ‘‘national bank or
Federal savings association’’;
■ g. In paragraphs (b)(1)(iii)(B), (2)(iii)
and (4), adding the words ‘‘or savings
association’s’’ after the word ‘‘bank’s’’;
and
■ h. In paragraph(b)(2)(i), adding the
words ‘‘or savings association’’ after the
word ‘‘bank’’ wherever it appears.
The revisions read as follows:
§ 7.1016 Independent undertakings issued
by a national bank or Federal savings
association to pay against documents.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
(a) In general. A national bank or
Federal savings association may issue
and commit to issue letters of credit and
other independent undertakings within
the scope of applicable laws or rules of
practice recognized by law.1 Under such
independent undertakings, the national
bank’s or Federal savings association’s
obligation to honor depends upon the
1 Examples of such laws or rules of practice
include: The applicable version of Article 5 of the
Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) (1962, as
amended 1990) or revised Article 5 of the UCC (as
amended 1995); the Uniform Customs and Practice
for Documentary Credits (International Chamber of
Commerce (ICC) Publication No. 600 or any
applicable prior version); the Supplements to UCP
500 & 600 for Electronic Presentation (eUCP v. 1.0,
1.1, & 2.0) (Supplements to the Uniform Customs
and Practices for Documentary Credits for
Electronic Presentation); International Standby
Practices (ISP98) (ICC Publication No. 590); the
United Nations Convention on Independent
Guarantees and Stand-by Letters of Credit (adopted
by the U.N. General Assembly in 1995 and signed
by the U.S. in 1997); and the Uniform Rules for
Bank-to-Bank Reimbursements Under Documentary
Credits (ICC Publication No. 725).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
presentation of specified documents and
not upon nondocumentary conditions or
resolution of questions of fact or law at
issue between the applicant and the
beneficiary. A national bank or Federal
savings association may also confirm or
otherwise undertake to honor or
purchase specified documents upon
their presentation under another
person’s independent undertaking
within the scope of such laws or rules.
As used in this section, the term
national bank includes Federal branches
and agencies of a foreign bank.
(b) * * * (1) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) The national bank or Federal
savings association either should be
fully collateralized or have a post-honor
right of reimbursement from the
applicant or from another issuer of an
independent undertaking. Alternatively,
if the national bank’s or Federal savings
association’s undertaking is to purchase
documents of title, securities, or other
valuable documents, the bank or savings
association should obtain a first priority
right to realize on the documents if the
bank or savings association is not
otherwise to be reimbursed.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 14. Revise § 7.1021 to read as follows:
§ 7.1021 Financial literacy programs not
branches of national banks
A financial literacy program is a
program the principal purpose of which
is to be educational for members of the
community. The premises of, or a
facility used by, a school or other
organization at which a national bank
participates in a financial literacy
program is not a branch for purposes of
12 U.S.C. 36 provided the bank does not
establish and operate the premises or
facility. The OCC considers
establishment and operation in this
context on a case by case basis,
considering the facts and circumstances.
However, the premises or facility is not
a branch of the national bank if the safe
harbor test in 12 CFR 7.1012(c)(2)
applicable to messenger services
established by third parties is satisfied.
The factor discussed in § 7.1012(c)(2)(i)
can be met if bank employee
participation in the financial literacy
program consists of managing the
program or conducting or engaging in
financial education activities provided
the school or other organization retains
control over the program and over the
premises or facilities at which the
program is held.
§ 7.1022
■
PO 00000
[Amended]
15. Amend § 7.1022 by:
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40821
a. In paragraph (d), removing the word
‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the word
‘‘may’’ wherever it appears; and
■ b. In paragraph (e), removing the word
‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the word
‘‘must’’ and removing the words ‘‘the
effective date of this regulation’’ and
adding in its place the words ‘‘April 1,
2018’’.
■
§ 7.1023
[Amended]
16. Amend § 7.1023 by:
a. In paragraph (c), removing the word
‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the word
‘‘may’’ and removing the words ‘‘federal
savings association’’ and adding in its
place the words ‘‘Federal savings
association’’; and
■ b. In paragraph (d):
■ i. Removing the word ‘‘shall’’ and
adding in its place the word ‘‘must’’;
■ ii. Removing the words ‘‘the effective
date of this regulation’’ and adding in its
place the words ‘‘April 1, 2018’’; and
■ iii. Removing the words ‘‘federal
savings association’’ and adding in its
place the words ‘‘Federal savings
association’’.
■
■
§ 7.1024
[Amended]
17. Amend redesignated § 7.1024 by:
a. In paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and(ii), and
(d), removing the word ‘‘shall’’ and
adding in its place the word ‘‘must’’
wherever it appears; and
■ b. In paragraph (e), removing the word
‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the word
‘‘may’’.
■ 18. Add § 7.1025 to read as follows:
■
■
§ 7.1025
Tax equity finance transactions.
(a) Tax equity finance transactions. A
national bank or Federal savings
association may engage in a tax equity
finance transaction pursuant to 12
U.S.C. 24(Seventh) and 1464 only if the
transaction is the functional equivalent
of a loan, as provided in paragraph (c)
of this section, and the transaction
satisfies applicable conditions in
paragraph (d) of this section.
(b) Definitions. For purposes of this
section:
(1) Tax equity finance transaction
means a transaction in which a national
bank or Federal savings association
provides equity financing to fund a
project that generates tax credits and
other tax benefits and the use of an
equity-based structure allows the
transfer of those credits and other tax
benefits to the national bank or Federal
savings association.
(2) Capital and surplus has the same
meaning that this term has in 12 CFR
32.2.
(c) Functional equivalent of a loan. A
tax equity finance transaction is the
functional equivalent of a loan if:
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
40822
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(1) The structure of the transaction is
necessary for making the tax credits and
other tax benefits available to the
national bank or Federal savings
association;
(2) The transaction is of limited
tenure and is not indefinite, such as a
limited investment interest required by
law to obtain continuing tax benefits;
(3) The tax benefits and other
payments received by the national bank
or Federal savings association from the
transaction repay the investment and
provide the implied rate of return;
(4) Consistent with paragraph (c)(3) of
this section, the national bank or
Federal savings association does not
rely on appreciation of value in the
project or property rights underlying the
project for repayment;
(5) The national bank or Federal
savings association uses underwriting
and credit approval criteria and
standards that are substantially
equivalent to the underwriting and
credit approval criteria and standards
used for a traditional commercial loan;
(6) The national bank or Federal
savings association is a passive investor
in the transaction and is unable to direct
the affairs of the project company; and
(7) The national bank or Federal
savings association appropriately
accounts for the transaction initially and
on an ongoing basis and has
documented contemporaneously its
accounting assessment and conclusion.
(d) Conditions on tax equity finance
transactions. A national bank or Federal
savings association may engage in tax
equity finance transactions only if:
(1) The national bank or Federal
savings association cannot control the
sale of energy, if any, from the project;
(2) The national bank or Federal
savings association limits the total
dollar amount of tax equity finance
transactions undertaken pursuant to this
section to no more than five percent of
its capital and surplus, unless the OCC
determines, by written approval of a
written request by the national bank or
Federal savings association to exceed
the five percent limit, that a higher
aggregate limit will not pose an
unreasonable risk to the national bank
or Federal savings association and that
the tax equity finance transactions in
the national bank’s or Federal savings
association’s portfolio will not be
conducted in an unsafe or unsound
manner; provided, however, that in no
case may a national bank or Federal
savings association’s total dollar amount
of tax equity finance transactions
undertaken pursuant to this section
exceed 15 percent of its capital and
surplus;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
(3) The national bank or Federal
savings association has provided written
notification to the OCC prior to engaging
in each tax equity finance transaction
that includes its evaluation of the risks
posed by the transaction; and
(4) The national bank or Federal
savings association can identify,
measure, monitor, and control the
associated risks of its tax equity finance
transaction activities individually and
as a whole on an ongoing basis to ensure
that such activities are conducted in a
safe and sound manner.
(e) Applicable legal requirements. The
transaction is subject to the substantive
legal requirements of a loan, including
the lending limits prescribed by 12
U.S.C. 84 and 12 U.S.C. 1464(u), as
appropriate, as implemented by 12 CFR
32, and if the active investor or project
sponsor of the transaction is an affiliate
of the bank, to the restrictions on
transactions with affiliates prescribed by
12 U.S.C. 371c and 371c–1, as
implemented by 12 CFR 223.
■ 19. Add § 7.1026 to read as follows:
§ 7.1026
Payment systems memberships.
(a) In general. National banks and
Federal savings associations may
become members of payment systems,
subject to the requirements of this
section.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section:
(1) Appropriate OCC supervisory
office means the OCC office that is
responsible for the supervision of a
national bank or Federal savings
association, as described in subpart A of
12 CFR part 4;
(2) Member includes a national bank
or Federal savings association
designated as a ‘‘member,’’ or
‘‘participant,’’ or other similar role by a
payment system, including by a
payment system that requires the
national bank or Federal savings
association to share in operational
losses or maintain a reserve with the
payment system to offset potential
liability for operational losses;
(3) Open-ended liability refers to
liability for operational losses that is not
capped under the rules of the payment
system and includes indemnifications
provided to third parties as a condition
of membership in the payment system;
(4) Operational loss means a charge
resulting from sources other than
defaults by other members of the
payment system; and
(5) Payment system means ‘‘financial
market utility’’ as defined in 12 U.S.C.
5462(6), wherever operating, and
includes both retail and wholesale
payment systems. Payment system does
not include a derivatives clearing
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
organization registered under the
Commodity Exchange Act, a clearing
agency registered under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, or foreign
organization that would be considered a
derivatives clearing organization or
clearing agency were it operating in the
United States.
(c) Notice requirements.
(1) Prior notice required. A national
bank or Federal savings association
must provide written notice to its
appropriate OCC supervisory office at
least 30 days prior to joining a payment
system that exposes it to open-ended
liability.
(2) After-the-fact notice. A national
bank or Federal savings association
must provide written notice to its
appropriate OCC supervisory office
within 30 days of joining a payment
system that does not expose it to openended liability.
(d) Content of notice.
(1) In general. A notice required by
paragraph (c) of this section must
include representations that the national
bank or Federal savings association:
(i) Has complied with the safety and
soundness review requirements in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section; and
(ii) Will comply with the safety and
soundness review and notification
requirements in paragraphs (e)(2) and
(3) of this section.
(2) Payment system limits on liability
or no liability. A notice filed under
paragraph (c)(2) of this section also must
include a representation that either:
(i) The rules of the payment system do
not impose liability for operational
losses on members; or
(ii) The national bank’s or Federal
savings association’s liability for
operational losses is limited by the rules
of the payment system to specific and
appropriate limits that do not exceed
the lower of:
(A) the legal lending limit under 12
CFR 32; or
(B) the limit set for the bank or
savings association by the OCC.
(e) Safety and soundness procedures.
(1) Prior to joining a payment system,
a national bank or Federal savings
association must:
(i) Identify and evaluate the risks
posed by membership in the payment
system, taking into account whether the
liability of the bank or savings
association is limited; and
(ii) Ensure that it can measure,
monitor, and control the risks identified
pursuant to paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this
section.
(2) After joining a payment system, a
national bank or Federal savings
association must manage the risks of the
payment system on an ongoing basis.
This ongoing risk management must:
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(i) Identify and evaluate the risks
posed by membership in the payment
system, taking into account whether the
liability of the bank or savings
association is limited; and
(ii) Measure, monitor, and control the
risks identified pursuant to paragraph
(e)(2)(i) of this section.
(3) If the national bank or Federal
savings association identifies risks
during the ongoing risk management
required by paragraph (e)(2) of this
section that raise safety and soundness
concerns, such as a material change to
the bank’s liability or indemnification
responsibilities, the national bank or
Federal savings association must:
(i) Notify the appropriate OCC
supervisory office as soon as the safety
and soundness concern is identified;
and
(ii) Take appropriate actions to
remediate the risk.
(4) A national bank or Federal savings
association that believes its open-ended
liability is otherwise limited (e.g., by
negotiated agreements or laws of an
appropriate jurisdiction) may consider
its liability to be limited for purposes of
the reviews required by paragraphs
(e)(1) and (2) of this section so long as:
(i) Prior to joining the payment
system, the bank or savings association
obtains an independent legal opinion
that:
(A) Describes how the payment
system allocates liability for operational
losses; and
(B) Concludes the potential liability
for operational losses for the national
bank or Federal savings association is in
fact limited to specific and appropriate
limits that do not exceed the lower of:
(1) The legal lending limit under 12
CFR 32; or
(2) The limit set for the bank or
savings association by the OCC; and
(ii) There are no material changes to
the liability or indemnification
requirements of the bank or savings
association since the issuance of the
independent legal opinion.
■ 20. Add § 7.1027 to read as follows:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 7.1027 Establishment and operation of a
remote service unit by a national bank.
A remote service unit (RSU) is an
automated or unstaffed facility, operated
by a customer of a bank with at most
delimited assistance from bank
personnel, that conducts banking
functions such as receiving deposits,
paying withdrawals, or lending money.
A national bank may establish and
operate an RSU pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
24(Seventh). An RSU includes an
automated teller machine, automated
loan machine, automated device for
receiving deposits, personal computer,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
telephone, other similar electronic
devices, and drop boxes. An RSU may
be equipped with a telephone or televideo device that allows contact with
bank personnel. An RSU is not a
‘‘branch’’ within the meaning of 12
U.S.C. 36(j), and is not subject to State
geographic or operational restrictions or
licensing laws.
■ 21. Add § 7.1028 to read as follows:
§ 7.1028 Establishment and operation of a
deposit production office by a national
bank.
(a) In general. A national bank or its
operating subsidiary may engage in
deposit production activities at a site
other than the main office or a branch
of the bank. A national bank or its
operating subsidiary may solicit
deposits, provide information about
deposit products, and assist persons in
completing application forms and
related documents to open a deposit
account at a deposit production office
(DPO). A DPO is not a branch within the
meaning of 12 U.S.C. 36(j) and 12 CFR
5.30(d)(1) so long as it does not receive
deposits, pay withdrawals, or make
loans. All deposit and withdrawal
transactions of a bank customer using a
DPO must be performed by the
customer, either in person at the main
office or a branch office of the bank, or
by mail, electronic transfer, or a similar
method of transfer.
(b) Services of other persons. A
national bank may use the services of,
and compensate, persons not employed
by the bank in its deposit production
activities.
■ 22. Add § 7.1029 to read as follows:
§ 7.1029 Combination of national bank
loan production office, deposit production
office, and remote service unit.
A location at which a national bank
operates a loan production office (LPO),
a deposit production office (DPO), and
a remote service unit (RSU) is not a
‘‘branch’’ within the meaning of 12
U.S.C. 36(j) by virtue of that
combination. Since an LPO, DPO, or
RSU is not, individually, a branch under
12 U.S.C. 36(j), any combination of
these facilities at one location does not
create a branch. The RSU at such a
combined location must be primarily
operated by the customer with at most
delimited assistance from bank
personnel.
■ 23. Add § 7.1030 to read as follows:
§ 7.1030 Permissible derivatives activities
for national banks.
(a) Authority. This section is issued
pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 24 (Seventh). A
national bank may only engage in
derivatives transactions in accordance
with the requirements of this section.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40823
(b) Definitions. For purposes of this
section:
(1) Customer-driven means a
transaction is entered into for a
customer’s valid and independent
business purpose (and a customerdriven transaction does not include a
transaction the principal purpose of
which is to deliver to a national bank
assets that the national bank could not
invest in directly);
(2) Perfectly-matched means two
back-to back derivatives transactions
that offset risk with respect to all
economic terms (e.g., amount, maturity,
duration, and underlying);
(3) Portfolio-hedged means a portfolio
of derivatives transactions that are
hedged based on net unmatched
positions or exposures in the portfolio;
(4) Physical hedging or physicallyhedged means holding title to or
acquiring ownership of an asset (for
example, by warehouse receipt or bookentry) solely to manage the risks arising
out of permissible customer-driven
derivatives transactions;
(5) Physical settlement or physicallysettled means accepting title to or
acquiring ownership of an asset;
(6) Transitory title transfer means
accepting and immediately
relinquishing title to an asset; and
(7) Underlying means the reference
asset, rate, obligation, or index on which
the payment obligation(s) between
counterparties to a derivative
transaction is based.
(c) In general. A national bank may
engage in the following derivatives
transactions after notice in accordance
with paragraph (d) of this section, as
applicable:
(1) Derivatives transactions with
payments based on underlyings a
national bank is permitted to purchase
directly as an investment;
(2) Derivatives transactions with any
underlying to hedge the risks arising
from bank-permissible activities;
(3) Derivatives transactions as a
financial intermediary with any
underlying that are customer-driven,
cash-settled, and either perfectlymatched or portfolio-hedged;
(4) Derivatives transactions as a
financial intermediary with any
underlying that are customer-driven,
physically-settled by transitory title
transfer, and either perfectly-matched or
portfolio-hedged; and
(5) Derivatives transactions as a
financial intermediary with any
underlying that are customer-driven,
physically-settled (other than by
transitory title transfer), physicallyhedged, and either perfectly-matched or
portfolio-hedged, and provided that (i)
the national bank does not take physical
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
40824
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
delivery of any commodity by receipt of
physical quantities of the commodity on
bank premises and (ii) physical hedging
activities meet the requirements of
paragraph (e) of this section.
(d) Notice procedure. (1) A national
bank must provide notice to its
Examiner-in-Charge prior to engaging in
any of the following with respect to
derivatives transactions with payments
based on underlyings that a national
bank is not permitted to purchase
directly as an investment:
(i) Engaging in derivatives hedging
activities pursuant to paragraph (c)(2) of
this section;
(ii) Expanding the bank’s derivatives
hedging activities pursuant to paragraph
(c)(2) of this section to include a new
category of underlying for derivatives
transactions;
(iii) Engaging in customer-driven
financial intermediation derivatives
activities pursuant to paragraphs (c)(3),
(4) or (5) of this section; and
(iv) Expanding the bank’s customerdriven financial intermediation
derivatives activities pursuant to
paragraphs (c)(3), (4) or (5) of this
section to include any new category of
underlyings.
(2) The notice pursuant to paragraph
(d)(1) of this section must be submitted
in writing at least 30 days before the
national bank commences the activity
and include the following information:
(i) A detailed description of the
proposed activity, including the
relevant underlyings;
(ii) The anticipated start date of the
activity; and
(iii) A detailed description of the
bank’s risk management system
(policies, processes, personnel, and
control systems) for identifying,
measuring, monitoring, and controlling
the risks of the activity.
(e) Additional requirements for
physical hedging activities. (1) A
national bank engaging in physical
hedging activities pursuant to paragraph
(c)(5) of this section must hold the
underlying solely to hedge risks arising
from derivatives transactions originated
by customers for the customers’ valid
and independent business purposes.
(2) The physical hedging activities
must offer a cost-effective means to
hedge risks arising from permissible
banking activities.
(3) The national bank must not take
anticipatory or maintain residual
positions in the underlying except as
necessary for the orderly establishment
or unwinding of a hedging position.
(4) The national bank must not
acquire equity securities for hedging
purposes that constitute more than 5
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
percent of a class of voting securities of
any issuer.
(5) With respect to physical hedging
involving commodities:
(i) A national bank’s physical position
in a particular physical commodity
(including, as applicable, delivery point,
purity, grade, chemical composition,
weight, and size) must not be more that
5 percent of the gross notional value of
the bank’s derivatives that are in that
particular physical commodity and
allow for physical settlement within 30
days. Title to commodities acquired and
immediately sold by a transitory title
transfer does not count against the 5
percent limit; and
(ii) The physical position must more
effectively reduce risk than a cashsettled hedge referencing the same
commodity.
■ 24. Amend § 7.2000 by:
■ a. Revising the section heading;
■ b. Revising paragraph (a);
■ c. In paragraph (b):
■ i. Removing the word ‘‘procedures’’
wherever it appears and adding in its
place the word ‘‘provisions’’;
■ ii. Removing the words ‘‘the state in
which the main office of the bank’’ and
adding in its place the words ‘‘any State
in which the main office or any branch
of the bank’’;
■ iii. Removing the words ‘‘the state in
which the holding company of the
bank’’ and adding in its place the words
‘‘the State in which a holding company
of the bank’’; and
■ iv. Removing the word ‘‘shall’’ and
adding in its place the word ‘‘must’’;
■ d. Redesignating paragraph (c) as
paragraph (d) and revising it; and
■ e. Adding a new paragraph (c).
The addition and revisions are set
forth below.
§ 7.2000
Corporate governance.
(a) In general. The corporate
governance provisions in a national
bank’s articles of association and bylaws
and the bank’s conduct of its corporate
governance affairs must comply with
applicable Federal banking statutes and
regulations and safe and sound banking
practices.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Continued use of former holding
company State. A national bank that has
elected to follow the corporate
governance provisions of the law of the
State in which its holding company is
incorporated may continue to use those
provisions even if the bank is no longer
controlled by that holding company.
(d) Request for OCC staff position. A
national bank may request the views of
OCC staff on the permissibility of a
national bank’s adoption of a particular
State corporate governance provision.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Requests must include the following
information:
(1) The name of the national bank;
(2) Citation to the State statutes or
regulations involved;
(3) A discussion as to whether a
similarly situated State bank is subject
to or may adopt the corporate
governance provision;
(4) Identification of all Federal
banking statutes or regulations that are
on the same subject as, or otherwise
have a bearing on, the subject of the
proposed State corporate governance
provision; and
(5) An analysis of how the proposed
practice is not inconsistent with
applicable Federal statutes or
regulations and is not inconsistent with
bank safety and soundness.
■ 25. Add § 7.2001 to read as follows:
§ 7.2001 National bank adoption of antitakeover provisions.
(a) In general. Pursuant to 12 CFR
7.2000(b), a national bank may adopt
anti-takeover provisions included in
State corporate governance law if the
provisions are not inconsistent with
Federal banking statutes or regulations
and not inconsistent with bank safety
and soundness.
(b) State anti-takeover provisions that
are not inconsistent with Federal
banking statutes or regulations. State
anti-takeover provisions that are not
inconsistent with Federal banking
statues or regulations include the
following:
(1) Restriction on business
combinations with interested
shareholders. State provisions that
prohibit, or that permit the corporation
to prohibit in its certificate of
incorporation or other governing
document, the corporation from
engaging in a business combination
with an interested shareholder or any
related entity for a specified period of
time from the date on which the
shareholder first becomes an interested
shareholder, subject to certain
exceptions such as board approval. An
interested shareholder is one that owns
an amount of stock specified in the State
provision.
(2) Poison pill. State provisions that
provide, or that permit the corporation
to provide in its certificate of
incorporation or other governing
document, that all the shareholders,
other than the hostile acquiror, have the
right to purchase additional stock at a
substantial discount upon the
occurrence of a triggering event.
(3) Requiring all shareholder action to
be taken at a meeting. State provisions
that provide, or that permit the
corporation to provide in its certificate
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
of incorporation or other governing
document, that all actions to be taken by
shareholders must occur at a meeting
and that shareholders may not take
action by written consent.
(4) Limits on shareholders’ authority
to call special meetings. State provisions
that provide, or that permit the
corporation to provide in its certificate
of incorporation or other governing
document, that:
(i) Only the board of directors, and
not the shareholders, have the right to
call special meetings of the
shareholders; or
(ii) If shareholders have the right to
call special meetings, a high percentage
of shareholders is needed to call the
meeting.
(5) Shareholder removal of a director
only for cause. State provisions that
provide, or that permit the corporation
to provide in its certificate of
incorporation or other governing
document, that shareholders may
remove a director only for cause, and
not both for cause and without cause.
(c) State anti-takeover provisions that
are inconsistent with Federal banking
statutes or regulations. The following
State anti-takeover provisions are
inconsistent with Federal banking
statutes or regulations:
(1) Supermajority voting
requirements. State provisions that
require, or that permit the corporation to
require in its certificate of incorporation
or other governing document, a
supermajority of the shareholders to
approve specified matters are
inconsistent when applied to matters for
which Federal banking statutes or
regulations specify the required level of
shareholder approval.
(2) Restrictions on a shareholder’s
right to vote all the shares it owns. State
provisions that prohibit, or that permit
the corporation in its certificate of
incorporation or other governing
document to prohibit, a person from
voting shares acquired that increase
their percentage of ownership of the
company’s stock above a certain level
are inconsistent when applied to
shareholder votes governed by 12 U.S.C.
61.
(d) Bank safety and soundness. (1) In
general. Except as provided in
paragraph (d)(2) of this section, any
State corporate governance provision,
including anti-takeover provisions, that
would render more difficult or
discourage an injection of capital by
purchase of bank stock, a merger, the
acquisition of the bank, a tender offer,
a proxy contest, the assumption of
control by a holder of a large block of
the bank’s stock, or the removal of the
incumbent board of directors or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
management is inconsistent with bank
safety and soundness if:
(i) The bank is less than adequately
capitalized (as defined in 12 CFR part
6);
(ii) The bank is in troubled condition
(as defined in 12 CFR 5.51(c)(7));
(iii) Grounds for the appointment of a
receiver under 12 U.S.C. 191 are
present; or
(iv) The bank is otherwise in less than
satisfactory condition, as determined by
the OCC.
(2) Exception. Anti-takeover
provisions are not inconsistent with
bank safety and soundness if, at the time
the bank adopts the provisions:
(i) The bank is not subject to any of
the conditions in paragraph (d)(1) of this
section; and
(ii) The bank includes, in its articles
of association or its bylaws, as
applicable pursuant to paragraph (f) of
this section, a limitation that would
make the provisions ineffective if:
(A) The conditions in paragraph (d)(1)
of this section exist; or
(B) The OCC otherwise directs the
bank not to follow the provision for
supervisory reasons.
(e) Case-by-case review. (1) OCC
Determination. Based on the substance
of the provision or the individual
circumstances of a national bank, the
OCC may determine that a State antitakeover provision, as proposed or
adopted by a bank, is:
(i) Inconsistent with Federal banking
statutes or regulations, notwithstanding
paragraph (b) of this section; or
(ii) Inconsistent with bank safety and
soundness other than as provided in
paragraph (d) of this section.
(2) Review. The OCC may initiate a
review, or a bank may request OCC
review pursuant to 12 CFR 7.2000(d), of
a State anti-takeover provision.
(f) Method of adoption for antitakeover provisions. (1) Board and
shareholder approval. A national bank
must follow the provisions for approval
by the board of directors and approval
of shareholders for the adoption of an
anti-takeover provision in the State
corporate governance law it has elected
to follow. However, if the provision is
included in the bank’s articles of
association, the bank’s shareholders
must approve the amendment of the
articles pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 21a, even
if the State law does not require
approval by the shareholders.
(2) Documentation. If the State
corporate governance law requires the
anti-takeover provision to be in the
company’s articles of incorporation,
certificate of incorporation, or similar
document, the national bank must
include the provision in its articles of
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40825
association. If the State corporate
governance law does not require the
provision to be in the company’s articles
of incorporation, certificate of
incorporation, or similar document, but
allows it to be in the bylaws, then the
national bank must include the
provision in either its articles of
association or in its bylaws, provided,
however, that if the State corporate
governance law requires shareholder
approval for changes to the
corporation’s bylaws, then the national
bank must include the provision in its
articles of association.
§ 7.2002
[Amended]
26. Amend § 7.2002 by adding the
words ‘‘for shareholder voting’’ after the
word ‘‘proxy’’ wherever it appears.
■ 27. Amend § 7.2005 by:
■ a. Revising the heading in paragraph
(a); and
■ b. Removing in paragraph (c)(3)(ii),
the word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place
the word ‘‘must’’.
The revision reads as follows:
■
§ 7.2005 Ownership of stock necessary to
qualify as director.
*
(a) In general. * * *
*
*
*
*
§ 7.2006
[Amended]
28. Amend § 7.2006 in the first
sentence by removing the word ‘‘shall’’
and adding in its place the word
‘‘must’’.
■
§ 7.2008
[Amended]
29. Amend § 7.2008 by:
a. In paragraph (a), removing the word
‘‘state’’ and adding in its place the word
‘‘State’’; and
■ b. In paragraph (b), removing the word
‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the word
‘‘must’’ wherever it appears.
■
■
§ 7.2009
[Amended]
30. Amend § 7.2009 by removing the
word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the
word ‘‘must’’.
■
§ 7.2010
[Amended]
31. Amend § 7.2010 in the first
sentence by removing the word ‘‘shall’’
and adding in its place the word
‘‘must’’.
■ 32. Revise § 7.2012 to read as follows:
■
§ 7.2012
President as director.
Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 76, the person
serving as, or in the function of,
president of a national bank, regardless
of title, must be a member of the board
of directors. A director other than the
person serving as, or in the function of,
president may be elected chairman of
the board.
■ 33. Revise § 7.2014 to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
40826
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 7.2014 Indemnification of institutionaffiliated parties.
The revision and additions read as
follows:
(a) Indemnification under State law.
Subject to the limitations of paragraph
(b) of this section, a national bank or
Federal savings association may
indemnify an institution-affiliated party
for damages and expenses, including the
advancement of expenses and legal fees,
in accordance with the law of the State
the bank or savings association has
designated for its corporate governance
pursuant to § 7.2000(b) (for national
banks), 12 CFR 5.21(j)(3)(iii) (for Federal
mutual savings associations), or 12 CFR
5.22(j)(2)(iii) (for Federal Stock savings
associations), provided such payments
are consistent with safe and sound
banking practices. The term
‘‘institution-affiliated party’’ has the
same meaning as set forth at 12 U.S.C.
1813(u).
(b) Administrative proceedings or civil
actions initiated by Federal banking
agencies. With respect to an
administrative proceeding or civil
action initiated by any Federal banking
agency, a national bank or Federal
savings association may only make or
agree to make indemnification payments
to an institution-affiliated party that are
reasonable and consistent with the
requirements of 12 U.S.C. 1828(k) and
the implementing regulations
thereunder.
(c) Written agreement required for
advancement. Before advancing funds
to an institutional-affiliated party under
this section, a national bank or Federal
savings association must obtain a
written agreement that the institutionaffiliated party will reimburse the bank
or savings association, as appropriate,
for any portion of that indemnification
that the institution-affiliated party is
ultimately found not to be entitled to
under 12 U.S.C. 1828(k) and the
implementing regulations thereunder,
except to the extent that the bank’s or
savings association’s expenses have
been reimbursed by an insurance policy
or fidelity bond.
(d) Insurance premiums. A national
bank or Federal savings association may
provide for the payment of reasonable
premiums for insurance covering the
expenses, legal fees, and liability of
institution-affiliated parties to the extent
that the expenses, fees, or liability could
be indemnified under this section.
■ 34. Amend § 7.2016 by:
■ a. Revising the section heading;
■ b. Redesignating paragraph (a) as
paragraph (a)(1) and adding a paragraph
heading to paragraph (a);
■ c. Redesignating paragraph (b) as
paragraph (a)(2); and
■ d. Adding a new paragraph (b).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
§ 7.2016 Restricting transfer of stock and
record dates; stock certificates.
(a) Restricting transfer of stock and
record dates.
(b) Bank stock certificates. (1) A
national bank may prescribe the manner
in which its stock must be transferred in
its bylaws or articles of association. A
bank issuing stock in certificated form
must comply with the requirements of
12 U.S.C. 52, including as to:
(i) The name and location of the bank;
(ii) The name of the holder of record
of the stock represented thereby;
(iii) The number and class of shares
which the certificate represents;
(iv) If the bank issues more than one
class of stock, the respective rights,
preferences, privileges, voting rights,
powers, restrictions, limitations, and
qualifications of each class of stock
issued (unless incorporated by reference
to the articles of association);
(v) Signatures of the president and
cashier of the bank, or such other
officers as the bylaws of the bank
provide; and
(vi) The seal of the bank.
(2) The requirements of paragraph
(b)(1)(v) of this section may be met
through the use of electronic means or
by facsimile.
§§ 7.2017 through 7.2018
■
§ 7.2020
■
[Removed]
35. Remove §§ 7.2017 through 7.2018.
[Removed]
36. Remove § 7.2020.
§ 7.2022
[Amended]
37. Amend § 7.2022 by removing the
word ‘‘state’’ and adding in its place the
word ‘‘State’’.
■
§ 7.2024
[Amended]
38. Amend § 7.2024 paragraphs (a)
and (c) by removing the word ‘‘shall’’
and adding in its place the word ‘‘must’’
wherever it appears.
■ 39. Add § 7.2025 to read as follows:
■
§ 7.2025 Capital stock-related activities of
a national bank.
(a) In general. A national bank must
obtain the necessary shareholder
approval required by 12 U.S.C. 51a, 57,
or 59 for any change in its permanent
capital. An increase or decrease in the
amount of a national bank’s common or
preferred stock is a change in permanent
capital subject to the notice and
approval requirements of 12 CFR 5.46
and applicable law. A national bank
may obtain the required shareholder
approval of changes in permanent
capital, as provided in paragraphs (b),
(c), and (d) of this section.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(b) Issuance of previously approved
and authorized common stock. In
compliance with 12 U.S.C. 57, a
national bank may issue common stock
up to an amount previously approved
and authorized in the national bank’s
articles of association by holders of twothirds of the national bank’s shares
without obtaining additional
shareholder approval for each
subsequent issuance within the
authorized amount.
(c) Issuance, Repurchase, and
Redemption of Preferred Stock Pursuant
to Certain Procedures. Subject to the
requirements of 12 U.S.C. 51a and 59, a
national bank may adopt procedures to
authorize the board of directors to issue,
determine the terms of, repurchase, and
redeem one or more series of preferred
stock, if permitted by the corporate
governance provisions adopted by the
bank under 12 CFR 7.2000. To satisfy
the shareholder approval requirements
of 12 U.S.C. 51a and 59, the adoption of
such procedures must be approved by
shareholders in advance through an
amendment to the national bank’s
articles of association. Any amendment
to a national bank’s articles of
association that authorizes both the
issuance and the repurchase and
redemption of shares must be approved
by holders of two-thirds of the national
bank’s shares.
(d) Share repurchase programs.
Subject to the requirements of 12 U.S.C.
59, a national bank may establish a
program for the repurchase, from time to
time, of the national bank’s common or
preferred stock, if permitted by the
corporate governance provisions
adopted by the bank under 12 CFR
7.2000. To satisfy the shareholder
approval requirement of 12 U.S.C. 59,
the repurchase program must be
approved in advance by the holders of
two-thirds of the national bank’s shares,
including through an amendment to the
national bank’s articles of association
that authorizes the board of directors to
repurchase the national bank’s common
or preferred stock from time to time
under board-determined parameters that
can limit the frequency, type, aggregate
limit, or purchase price of repurchases.
(e) Preferred Stock Features. A
national bank’s preferred stock may be
cumulative or non-cumulative and may
or may not have voting rights on one or
more series.
■ 40. Revise the heading for subpart C
of this part to read as follows:
Subpart C—National Bank and Federal
Savings Association Operations
■
41. Revise § 7.3000 to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 7.3000 National bank and Federal
savings association banking hours and
closings.
(a) Banking hours. The board of
directors of a national bank or Federal
savings association, or an equivalent
person or committee of a Federal branch
or agency, should review its hours of
operations for customers and,
independently of any other bank,
savings association, or Federal branch or
agency, take appropriate action to
establish a schedule of operating hours
for customers.
(b) Emergency closings declared by
the Comptroller. Pursuant to 12 U.S.C.
95(b)(1) and 1463(a)(1)(A), the
Comptroller of the Currency
(Comptroller), may declare any day a
legal holiday if emergency conditions
exist. That day is a legal holiday for
national banks, Federal savings
associations, and Federal branches or
agencies in the affected geographic area
(i.e., throughout the United States, in a
State, or in part of a State), and national
banks, Federal savings associations, and
Federal branches and agencies may
temporarily limit or suspend operations
at their affected offices, unless the
Comptroller by written order directs
otherwise. Emergency conditions may
be caused by acts of nature or of man
and may include natural and other
disasters, public health or safety
emergencies, civil and municipal
emergencies, and cyber threats or other
unauthorized intrusions (e.g., severe
flooding, a pandemic, terrorism, a cyberattack on bank systems, or a power
emergency declared by a local power
company or government requesting that
businesses in the affected area close).
The Comptroller may issue a
proclamation authorizing the emergency
closing in anticipation of the emergency
condition, at the time of the emergency
condition, or soon thereafter. In the
absence of a Comptroller declaration of
a bank holiday, a national bank, Federal
savings associations, or Federal branch
or agency may choose to temporarily
close offices in response to an
emergency condition. The national
bank, Federal savings associations, or
Federal branch or agency should notify
the OCC of such temporary closure as
soon as feasible.
(c) Emergency and ceremonial
closings declared by a State or State
official. In the event a State or a legally
authorized State official declares any
day to be a legal holiday for emergency
or ceremonial reasons in that State or
part of the State, that same day is a legal
holiday for national banks, Federal
savings associations, and Federal
branches or agencies or their offices in
the affected geographic area. National
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Jul 06, 2020
Jkt 250001
banks, Federal savings associations, and
Federal branches or agencies or their
affected offices may close their affected
offices or remain open on such a Statedesignated holiday, unless the
Comptroller by written order directs
otherwise.
(d) Liability. A national bank, Federal
savings association, or Federal branch or
agency should assure that all liabilities
or other obligations under the
applicable law due to its closing are
satisfied.
(e) Definition. For the purpose of this
subpart, the term ‘‘State’’ means any of
the several States, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands,
Guam, the Virgin Islands, American
Samoa, the Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands, or any other territory or
possession of the United States.
§ 7.3001
[Amended]
42. Amend § 7.3001 by:
a. In paragraph (a)(1), removing the
words ‘‘Lease excess space’’ and adding
in its place the words ‘‘Consistent with
§ 7.1024 of this title, lease excess
space’’;
■ b. In paragraph (c) introductory text,
removing the word ‘‘shall’’ and adding
in its place the word ‘‘must’’; and
■ c. In paragraph (c)(3), removing the
word ‘‘state’’ and adding in its place the
word ‘‘State’’.
■
■
§§ 7.4003 through 7.4005
■
[Removed]
43. Remove §§ 7.4003 through 7.4005.
§ 7.4010
[Amended]
44. Amend the section heading for
§ 7.4010 by removing the word ‘‘state’’
and adding in its place the word
‘‘State’’.
■
§ 7.5001
■
[Removed]
45. Remove § 7.5001.
PART 145—FEDERAL SAVINGS
ASSOCIATIONS—OPERATIONS
46. The authority citation for part 145
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1462a, 1463, 1464,
1828, 5412(b)(2)(B).
§ 145.121
■
[Removed]
47. Remove § 145.121.
PART 160—LENDING AND
INVESTMENT
48. The authority citation for part 160
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1462a, 1463, 1464,
1467a, 1701j–3, 1828, 3803, 3806,
5412(b)(2)(B); 42 U.S.C. 4106.
§ 160.50
■
PO 00000
[Removed]
49. Remove § 160.50.
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
§ 160.120
■
40827
[Removed]
50. Remove § 160.120.
Brian P. Brooks,
Acting Comptroller of the Currency.
[FR Doc. 2020–12435 Filed 7–6–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–33–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency
12 CFR Parts 7 and 155
[Docket ID OCC–2019–0028]
RIN 1557–AE74
National Bank and Federal Savings
Association Digital Activities
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Office of the Comptroller
of the Currency (OCC) is interested in
making sure it is aware of and
understands the evolution of financial
services, so it ensures the federal
banking system continues to serve
consumers, businesses, and
communities effectively. Further,
national banks and Federal savings
associations (banks) must have a
regulatory and supervisory framework
that enables banks to adapt to rapidly
changing trends and technology
developments in the financial
marketplace to meet customers’
evolving needs while continuing to
operate in a safe and sound manner. The
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC) is reviewing its
regulations on bank digital activities to
ensure that its regulations continue to
evolve with developments in the
industry. This advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPR) solicits
public input as part of this review.
DATES: Comments must be received by
August 3, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Commenters are encouraged
to submit comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal or email, if possible.
Please use the title ‘‘National Bank and
Federal Savings Association Digital
Activities’’ to facilitate the organization
and distribution of the comments. You
may submit comments by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal—
Regulations.gov Classic or
Regulations.gov Beta: Regulations.gov
Classic: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov/. Enter ‘‘Docket ID
OCC–2019–0028’’ in the Search Box and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07JYP2.SGM
07JYP2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 130 (Tuesday, July 7, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40794-40827]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12435]
[[Page 40793]]
Vol. 85
Tuesday,
No. 130
July 7, 2020
Part III
Department of the Treasury
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
12 CFR Parts 7, 145, 155, et al.
Activities and Operations of National Banks and Federal Savings
Associations; National Bank and Federal Savings Association Digital
Activities; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 7, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 40794]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
12 CFR Parts 7, 145 and 160
[Docket ID OCC-2020-0003]
RIN 1557-AE74
Activities and Operations of National Banks and Federal Savings
Associations
AGENCY: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is issuing a
notice of proposed rulemaking to revise and reorganize its regulations
relating to the activities and operations of national banks and Federal
savings associations. This proposal would clarify and codify recent OCC
interpretations, integrate certain regulations for national banks and
Federal savings associations, and update or eliminate outdated
regulatory requirements that no longer reflect the modern financial
system.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 3, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Commenters are encouraged to submit comments through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal or email, if possible. Please use the title
``Activities and Operations of National Banks and Federal Savings
Associations'' to facilitate the organization and distribution of the
comments. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal--Regulations.gov Classic or
Regulations.gov Beta Regulations.gov Classic: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/. Enter ``Docket ID OCC 2020-0003'' in the Search
Box and click ``Search.'' Click on ``Comment Now'' to submit public
comments. For help with submitting effective comments please click on
``View Commenter's Checklist.'' Click on the ``Help'' tab on the
Regulations.gov home page to get information on using Regulations.gov,
including instructions for submitting public comments.
Regulations.gov Beta: Go to https://beta.regulations.gov/ or click
``Visit New Regulations.gov Site'' from the Regulations.gov classic
homepage. Enter ``Docket ID OCC-2020-0003'' in the Search Box and click
``Search.'' Public comments can be submitted via the ``Comment'' box
below the displayed document information or click on the document title
and click the ``Comment'' box on the top-left side of the screen. For
help with submitting effective comments please click on ``Commenter's
Checklist.'' For assistance with the Regulations.gov Beta site please
call (877)-378-5457 (toll free) or (703) 454-9859 Monday-Friday, 9
a.m.-5 p.m. ET or email to [email protected].
Email: [email protected].
Mail: Chief Counsel's Office, Attention: Comment
Processing, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street
SW, Suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.
Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E-218,
Washington, DC 20219.
Fax: (571) 465-4326.
Instructions: You must include ``OCC'' as the agency name and
``Docket ID OCC-2020-0003'' in your comment. In general, the OCC will
enter all comments received into the docket and publish the comments on
the Regulations.gov website without change, including any business or
personal information provided such as name and address information,
email addresses, or phone numbers. Comments received, including
attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public
record and subject to public disclosure. Do not include any information
in your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential
or inappropriate for public disclosure.
You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to
this rulemaking action by any of the following methods:
Viewing Comments Electronically--Regulations.gov Classic
or Regulations.gov Beta:Regulations.gov Classic: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/. Enter ``Docket ID OCC-2020-0003'' in the Search
box and click ``Search.'' Click on ``Open Docket Folder'' on the right
side of the screen. Comments and supporting materials can be viewed and
filtered by clicking on ``View all documents and comments in this
docket'' and then using the filtering tools on the left side of the
screen. Click on the ``Help'' tab on the Regulations.gov home page to
get information on using Regulations.gov. The docket may be viewed
after the close of the comment period in the same manner as during the
comment period.
Regulations.gov Beta: Go to https://beta.regulations.gov/ or click
``Visit New Regulations.gov Site'' from the Regulations.gov classic
homepage. Enter ``Docket ID OCC-2020-0003'' in the Search Box and click
``Search.'' Click on the ``Comments'' tab. Comments can be viewed and
filtered by clicking on the ``Sort By'' drop-down on the right side of
the screen or the ``Refine Results'' options on the left side of the
screen. Supporting Materials can be viewed by clicking on the
``Documents'' tab and filtered by clicking on the ``Sort By'' drop-down
on the right side of the screen or the ``Refine Results'' options on
the left side of the screen.'' For assistance with the Regulations.gov
Beta site please call (877)-378-5457 (toll free) or (703) 454-9859
Monday-Friday, 9 a.m.-5 p.m. ET or email to
[email protected].
The docket may be viewed after the close of the comment period in
the same manner as during the comment period.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beth Kirby, Assistant Director,
Valerie Song, Assistant Director, Heidi Thomas, Special Counsel, or
Chris Rafferty, Attorney, Chief Counsel's Office, (202) 649-5490,
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street SW,
Washington, DC 20219. For persons who are deaf or hearing impaired,
TTY, (202) 649-5597.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) periodically
reviews its regulations to eliminate outdated or otherwise unnecessary
regulatory provisions and, where possible, to clarify or revise
requirements imposed on national banks and Federal savings
associations. These reviews are in addition to the OCC's decennial
review of its regulations as required by the Economic Growth and
Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act (EGRPRA).\1\ These reviews also
consider, where appropriate, opportunities to integrate rules that
apply to national banks with similar rules that apply to Federal
savings associations in light of the transfer to the OCC of all
functions of the former Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) relating to
Federal savings association by Title III of the Dodd-
[[Page 40795]]
Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 104-208 (1996), codified at 12 U.S.C. 3311(b).
Section 2222 of EGRPRA requires that, at least once every 10 years,
the OCC along with the other Federal banking agencies and the
Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) conduct a
review of their regulations to identify outdated or otherwise
unnecessary regulatory requirements imposed on insured depository
institutions. Specifically, EGRPRA requires the agencies to
categorize and publish their regulations for comment, eliminate
unnecessary regulations to the extent that such action is
appropriate, and submit a report to Congress summarizing their
review. The agencies completed their second EGRPRA review on March
2017 and published their report in the Federal Register. 82 FR 15900
(March 30, 2017).
\2\ Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010) (transferring to
the OCC all functions of the former OTS relating to Federal savings
associations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of this process, the OCC is proposing to revise and
reorganize subparts A through D of 12 CFR part 7, Activities and
Operations. Specifically, the OCC is proposing new regulations or
updates to existing regulations to address developing issues and
industry practices and to clarify OCC interpretive positions. For
example, proposed revisions to subpart A include new regulations
covering tax equity finance transactions, derivatives activities, and
payment system memberships. Proposed revisions to subpart B address
corporate governance issues, such as expanding the ability of national
banks to choose corporate governance provisions under State or other
law, clarifying permissible anti-takeover provisions, and adding
provisions relating to capital stock-related activities of national
banks. The OCC also is proposing to update and integrate rules relating
to bank hours and closings in subpart C and to update rules relating to
loan production and deposit production offices and remote service units
in subpart D and move these sections to subpart A to improve the
organization of part 7.\3\ As a companion to this proposed rule, the
OCC is separately issuing an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(ANPR), published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register as a
separate document, that requests comment on subpart E of 12 CFR part 7
and 12 CFR part 155, the OCC's rules on electronic banking activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The OCC has separately proposed a rule that would amend 12
CFR 7.4001. See 84 FR 64229 (Nov. 21, 2019) (Permissible Interest on
Loans That Are Sold, Assigned, or Otherwise Transferred). The OCC
also has issued an interim final rule that amends 12 CFR 7.1001 and
7.1003. See 85 FR 31943 (May 28, 2020) (Director, Shareholder, and
Member Meetings).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC also is proposing more general changes throughout part 7
including removing outdated or superfluous regulations; consolidating
related regulations into one section; and making various technical
changes throughout part 7. In addition, the OCC is proposing to
integrate a number of rules in part 7 to include Federal savings
associations.
This proposed rule accompanies other OCC efforts to modernize OCC
rules, remove unnecessary burden, and clarify requirements, including
the proposed rule published in the Federal Register on April 2, 2020,
which would amend requirements in 12 CFR part 5 for national banks and
Federal savings associations that seek to engage in certain corporate
transactions or activities.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 85 FR 18728.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
Subpart A--National Banks and Federal Savings Association Powers
Activities That are Part of, or Incidental to, the Business of Banking
(New Sec. 7.1000)
Section 7.5001 identifies the criteria that the OCC uses to
determine whether an electronic activity is authorized for national
banks as part of, or incidental to, the business of banking under 12
U.S.C. 24(Seventh) or other statutory authority. While this section
details those criteria in the context of electronic activities, the OCC
uses these same criteria to determine whether any activity is part of,
or incidental to, the business of banking. To confirm the broader
applicability of the criteria listed in Sec. 7.5001, the OCC is
proposing to remove the word ``electronic'' from this section and move
Sec. 7.5001 to subpart A of part 7 as new Sec. 7.1000. As part of
this move, the proposal would redesignate current Sec. 7.1000 as Sec.
7.1024. These proposed changes would better organize OCC rules and
clarify that the criteria of this new Sec. 7.1000 may apply to any
potential national bank activity and not just those that are electronic
in nature. The OCC believes that new Sec. 7.1000 belongs at the
beginning of part 7 because it provides the framework for all national
bank powers that follow in subpart A.
The OCC also proposes a technical change to Sec. 7.1000(c)(1).
Specifically, the proposed rule would amend this provision to clarify
that the four-factor test set forth in this section to determine
activities authorized as part of the business of banking applies to
activities not specifically included in 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) or other
statutory authority. Activities that are specifically included in 12
U.S.C. 24(Seventh) or other statutory authority are by express
statutory language within the business of banking. This clarification
reflects the OCC's long-standing use of the four-factor test to
determine whether an activity not expressly included in a statute is
within the business of banking.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The Supreme Court has held that the business of banking is
not limited to the enumerated powers listed in 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh)
but encompasses more broadly activities that are part of or
incidental to the business of banking. NationsBank of N.C., N.A. v.
Variable Annuity Life Ins. Co., 513 U.S. 251, 258-60 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Bank Acting as Finder (Sec. 7.1002)
The OCC is proposing a technical change to its finder regulation at
Sec. 7.1002 and invites comment on the inclusion of Federal savings
association finder activities in part 7. The OCC has long permitted a
national bank to act as a finder to bring together buyers and sellers
of financial and nonfinancial products and services.\6\ The OCC's
regulations include two separate rules relating to permissible national
bank finder activities. Section 7.1002, which codifies OCC interpretive
letters, provides that finder activities are part of the business of
banking.\7\ This section also describes permissible finder activities;
provides an illustrative, non-exclusive list of permissible finder
activities; clarifies that a national bank's finder authority does not
allow it to engage in brokerage activities that have not been found to
be permissible for national banks; and authorizes a national bank to
advertise and accept fees for finder services unless otherwise
prohibited by Federal law. Section 7.5002 provides that a national bank
generally may perform, provide, or deliver through electronic means and
facilities any activity, function, product, or service that is
otherwise permissible. Section 7.5002(a)(1) clarifies that a national
bank may act as electronic finders and includes a list of permissible
electronic finder activities.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 607 (Aug. 24, 1992).
\7\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 824 (Feb. 27, 1998).
\8\ The OCC's ANPR on National Bank and Federal Savings
Association Use of Digital Technology, published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register as a separate document, also requests
comment on whether to add more examples to the electronic finder
activities list in 12 CFR 7.5002(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC is proposing to amend its regulations by adding a new
paragraph (8) to Sec. 7.1002(b) that would cross-reference the
permissible electronic finder activities listed in Sec. 7.5002(a)(1).
This change would reference all examples of permissible finder
activities for national banks in one rule.
While finder activities are part of the business of banking for a
national bank, a Federal savings association may engage in a finder
activity only to the extent that the activity is incidental to Federal
savings association powers authorized under the Home Owners' Loan Act
(HOLA) (12 U.S.C. 1461 et seq).\9\ The former OTS determined that,
[[Page 40796]]
if certain factors are met, a Federal savings association may collect
fees for referring customers to third parties \10\ and may provide
services and products to customers through a third-party discount
program \11\ as activities incidental to their statutorily enumerated
powers. The OCC also has recognized Federal savings association finder
authority in its Retail Nondeposit Investment Products Booklet of the
Comptroller's Handbook.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The OCC and the predecessor agencies previously responsible
for the supervision of Federal savings associations ``have long
recognized that federal savings associations possess `incidental'
powers, i.e., powers that are incident to the express powers of
federal savings associations as set forth in the Home Owners' Loan
Act.'' OTS Op. Acting Ch. Couns. at 3 (Mar. 25, 1994).
\10\ OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (May 5, 2000).
\11\ OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (Aug. 5, 2008).
\12\ OCC, Comptroller's Handbook: Retail Nondeposit Investment
Products Booklet at 9 (Jan. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC invites comment on whether it should add a separate
provision to Sec. 7.1002 to set forth Federal savings association
finder authority. This provision could provide that a Federal savings
association may engage in finder activities to the extent that those
activities are incidental to Federal savings association powers
expressly authorized under the HOLA. The OCC also could include in this
provision a list of Federal savings association finder activities that
the former OTS or the OCC have determined are permissible. This list
could codify prior interpretations and include collecting fees for
referring customers to third parties and providing services and
products to customers through a third-party discount program. The OCC
specifically requests comment on what other Federal savings association
finder activities the OCC could add to this list.
Money Lent by a National Bank at Banking Offices or at Facilities Other
Than Banking Offices (Sec. 7.1003)
Twelve U.S.C. 81 provides that a national bank must transact
business in the place specified in its organization certificate and in
any branches established or maintained in accordance with 12 U.S.C. 36.
The OCC interprets 12 U.S.C. 81 to mean that money is deemed to be lent
at a bank's main office unless there is a sufficient nexus tying the
transaction to another location, in which case that location must be
licensed as a branch office.
Twelve U.S.C. 36 and 12 CFR 5.30 define ``branch'' as a place of
business established by the national bank where ``deposits are
received, or checks paid, or money lent.'' Section 7.1003 provides that
for purposes of what constitutes a branch within the meaning of 12
U.S.C. 36 and 12 CFR 5.30, ``money'' is deemed to be ``lent'' only at
the place, if any, where the borrower in-person receives loan proceeds
directly from bank funds either: (1) From the lending bank or its
operating subsidiary or (2) at a facility that is established by the
lending bank or its operating subsidiary. Section 7.1003(b) further
provides that a borrower may receive loan proceeds directly from bank
funds in person at a place that is not the bank's main office and is
not licensed as a branch without violating 12 U.S.C. 36, 12 U.S.C. 81,
and 12 CFR 5.30, provided that a third party is used to deliver the
funds and the place is not established by the lending bank or its
operating subsidiary. This paragraph defines a third party to include a
person who satisfies the requirements of Sec. 7.1012(c)(2) or one who
customarily delivers loan proceeds directly from bank funds under
accepted industry practice, such as an attorney or escrow agent at a
real estate closing.
The OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.1003 to incorporate an OCC
interpretation that further clarifies when the OCC considers money to
be lent at a location other than the main office. Specifically,
proposed paragraph (c) would provide that a national bank operating
subsidiary may distribute loan proceeds from its own funds or bank
funds directly to the borrower in person at offices the operating
subsidiary established without violating 12 U.S.C. 36, 12 U.S.C. 81,
and 12 CFR 5.30 if the operating subsidiary provides similar services
on substantially similar terms and conditions to customers of
unaffiliated entities, including unaffiliated banks.\13\ Based on
Supreme Court precedent,\14\ OCC interpretations have recognized that a
facility must provide a convenience to bank customers that gives the
bank a competitive advantage in obtaining customers for the facility to
be considered a branch for purposes of 12 U.S.C. 36 and 12 CFR
5.30.\15\ The OCC has found that a facility where members of the
public, customers, and noncustomers alike receive substantially similar
services on substantially similar terms is not a facility created to
attract bank customers and thus the establishment of this type of
facility offers no competitive advantage to the national bank.\16\
Proposed paragraph (c) reflects this OCC precedent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Interpretive Letter No. 814 (Nov. 3, 1997).
\14\ In First National Bank in Plant City v. Dickinson, the
Supreme Court explained that because the purpose of 12 U.S.C. 36 is
to maintain competitive equality, it is relevant in construing the
term ``branch'' to consider whether the facility gives the bank an
advantage in its competition for customers. First National Bank in
Plant City v. Dickinson, 396 U.S. 122, 136-137 (1969).
\15\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 635 (July 23, 1993). See
also 61 FR 60342, 60347 (Nov. 27, 1996).
\16\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 814 (Nov. 3, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishment of a Loan Production Office by a National Bank (Sec.
7.1004)
Credit Decisions at Other Than Banking Offices of a National Bank
(Sec. 7.1005)
Section 7.1004 provides that a national bank may use the services
of persons not employed by the bank for originating loans. It also
provides that an employee or agent of a national bank or its subsidiary
may originate a loan at a site other than the main office or a branch
office of the bank without violating the branching and place of
business requirements of 12 U.S.C. 36 and 12 U.S.C. 81 if the loan is
approved and made at the main office or a branch office of the bank or
at an office of an operating subsidiary located on the premises of, or
contiguous to, the main office or branch office of the bank. Section
7.1005 provides that a national bank and its operating subsidiary may
make a credit decision regarding a loan application at a site other
than the main office or a branch office of the bank provided that
``money'' is not ``lent'' at those other sites within the meaning of
Sec. 7.1003.
OCC precedent has explained that the purpose of Sec. 7.1004 is not
to prescribe where certain activities must be performed but rather to
help avoid violations of the branching laws by defining a ``safe
harbor'' of loan origination activities that will not constitute
branching.\17\ Further, the OCC has stated that this section does not
purport to address the outer limits of what is permissible nor
establish any affirmative requirement for where loan production office
(LPO)-originated loans must be approved or made.\18\ The OCC has found
that Sec. 7.1004 should not be read to require loans originated at
LPOs to be approved and made at a main or branch office, and that it is
permissible for loans originated at an LPO to be approved at separate
back office facilities not located on the premises of, or contiguous
to, a main or branch office of the bank.\19\ These OCC interpretations
were codified in Sec. 7.1005. When the OCC adopted Sec. 7.1005, the
agency noted that it was retaining Sec. 7.1004 despite the potential
tension between the two sections because Sec. 7.1004 is a judicially
recognized safe harbor permitting national banks to undertake certain
[[Page 40797]]
lending related activities without violating branching statutes, and
that it did not view a lending related activity that falls outside the
scope of Sec. 7.1004, as with Sec. 7.1005 regarding the making of
credit decisions, as necessarily violating branching statutes.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 634 (July 23, 1993).
\18\ Id.; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 667 (Oct. 12, 1994).
\19\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 667 (Oct. 12, 1994).
\20\ 61 FR 4849, 4851 (Feb. 9, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.1004 so that it reflects the
broader permissibility provided by current Sec. 7.1005, to describe
the permitted activities as ``loan production activities,'' and to
remove Sec. 7.1005 to simplify and streamline its rules. As proposed,
paragraph (a) of Sec. 7.1004 would provide that a national bank or its
operating subsidiary may engage in loan production activities at a site
other than the main office or a branch office of the bank. The proposal
would permit a national bank or its operating subsidiary to solicit
loan customers, market loan products, assist persons in completing
application forms and related documents to obtain a loan, originate and
approve loans, make credit decisions regarding a loan application, and
offer other lending-related services such as loan information and
applications at a loan production office without violating 12 U.S.C. 36
and 12 U.S.C. 81, provided that ``money'' is not deemed to be ``lent''
at that site within the meaning of Sec. 7.1003 and the site does not
accept deposits or pay withdrawals. This description of activities is
not intended to alter the description of ``money lent'' in Sec. 7.1003
nor affect the scope of activities that are permissible for a national
bank to perform at a non-branch location. Rather, the OCC is proposing
this description to provide greater clarity to what activities a
national bank may conduct at a loan production office. As a technical
change, the OCC would redesignate former paragraph (a) as paragraph (b)
and amend it to reference loan production activities instead of
originating loans.
Loan Agreement Providing for a National Bank Share In Profits, Income,
or Earnings or for Stock Warrants (Sec. 7.1006)
The OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.1006 to include Federal
savings associations. Section 7.1006 permits a national bank to take as
consideration for a loan: (1) A share in the profit, income, or
earnings from a business enterprise of a borrower or (2) a stock
warrant issued by the business enterprise of a borrower provided the
bank does not exercise the warrant. This arrangement is known as an
``equity kicker.'' Section 7.1006 further provides that the national
bank may take the share or stock warrant in addition to, or in lieu of,
interest. However, the national bank may not condition the borrower's
ability to repay principal on the value of the profit, income, earnings
of the business enterprise or upon the value of the warrant received.
The former OTS and its predecessor, the Federal Home Loan Bank
Board, permitted a Federal savings association to take a share of
profit, income, or earnings as consideration for a loan as not
inconsistent with Federal savings association lending authority under
HOLA \21\ to maintain parity with the commercial lending practices of
national banks.\22\ In addition, the former OTS permitted a Federal
savings association to acquire warrants as an incidental power of its
authority to make secured loans for commercial, corporate, or business
purposes under HOLA and applied the same restrictions on exercising
those warrants as applied to national banks.\23\ By amending Sec.
7.1006 to include Federal savings associations, the proposed rule would
codify these interpretations to clarify this authority and to better
provide parity with national banks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 12 U.S.C. 1464(c)(2).
\22\ Unpublished letter from Jordan Luke, Gen. Couns., Federal
Home Loan Bank Board (Dec. 19, 1988), available on Westlaw: 1988 WL
1022319 (O.T.S.).
\23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Bank Holding Collateral Stock as Nominee (Sec. 7.1009)
Current Sec. 7.1009 permits a national bank to transfer stock it
has received as collateral for a loan into the bank's name as
nominee.\24\ The OCC believes this provision is unnecessary and is
proposing to delete it. The OCC permits a bank to perfect its security
interests in collateral under applicable State laws consistent with the
Uniform Commercial Code.\25\ In situations where a bank holds stock as
collateral, typically one method to perfect that interest under State
law is to list the bank as nominee on the stock certificate. However,
recent versions of the Uniform Commercial Code \26\ provide other
potentially less burdensome methods to perfect an interest in
securities collateral, for example, by obtaining control over a
brokerage account holding the stock. Therefore, the OCC believes that
Sec. 7.1009 is not necessary. Removing this provision would streamline
OCC regulations while not substantively changing the methods national
banks may use to perfect their interests in stock or other securities
obtained as collateral for loans, which continue to include being
listed as nominee if permitted under State law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh).
\25\ See OCC, Comptroller's Handbook: Asset-Based Lending at 21-
22 (2017).
\26\ Primarily Articles 8 and 9, which have been substantively
adopted by all U.S. jurisdictions. See https://www.uniformlaws.org/acts/ucc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Postal Services by National Banks and Federal Savings Associations
(Sec. 7.1010)
Section 7.1010 provides that a national bank may operate a postal
substation on banking premises and receive income from it. It describes
the types of services permitted and states that a bank may advertise
them to attract customers to the bank. It also requires the bank to
operate the substation in accordance with the rules and regulations of
the United States Postal Service (USPS) and to keep books and records
on it, which are subject to inspection by the USPS, separate from those
of other banking operations.
The OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.1010 to also apply to Federal
savings associations, consistent with the position taken in agency
guidance.\27\ The OCC also proposes to replace the words ``operate a
postal substation'' with ``provide postal services'' because the term
``Postal substation'' is no longer used in USPS regulations. This
change in terminology would clarify that national banks and Federal
savings associations may offer a limited menu of postal services and
are not required to operate full-service post offices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ The former OTS previously concluded that Federal savings
associations are authorized to operate a postal substation on
premises. See OTS Op. Acting Ch. Couns., Mar. 25, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Bank Receipt of Stock From a Small Business Investment Company
(Sec. 7.1015)
Fifteen U.S.C. 682(b)(1) permits a national bank to invest in one
or more small business investment companies (SBICs) or in any entity
established solely to invest in SBICs, provided that the total amount
of all SBIC investments does not exceed five percent of the bank's
capital and surplus.\28\ Section 7.1015 provides that a national bank
may purchase stock of a SBIC and receive benefits of such stock
ownership. This section further provides that the receipt and retention
of a dividend from a SBIC in the form of stock of a corporate borrower
of the SBIC is not a purchase of stock within the meaning of 12 U.S.C.
24(Seventh).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ National banks also may invest in SBICs pursuant to their
community development investment authority See 12 U.S.C.
24(Eleventh) and 12 CFR part 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.1015 to provide that a
national bank
[[Page 40798]]
may invest in a SBIC or in any entity established solely to invest in
SBICs, and that purchasing stock in a SBIC is one example of this type
of investment. This amendment would more closely align Sec. 7.1015 to
15 U.S.C. 682(b). In addition, the OCC is proposing to amend Sec.
7.1015 to provide that a national bank's SBIC investments are subject
to appropriate capital limitations.
Fifteen U.S.C. 682(b)(2) provides a Federal savings association
with similar authority to invest in SBICs.\29\ This authority is
codified in OCC regulations at 12 CFR 160.30. To clarify this
authority, the OCC is proposing to add a reference to Federal savings
association SBIC authority in Sec. 7.1015 and cross-reference to 12
CFR 160.30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ As with national banks, Federal savings associations also
may invest in SBICs pursuant to their community development
investment authority. See 12 U.S.C. 1464(c)(4)(B) and 12 CFR 5.59
(Service corporations of Federal savings associations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC also is proposing to amend Sec. 7.1015 to clarify that a
national bank or Federal savings association may invest in a SBIC that
is either (1) already organized and has obtained a license from the
Small Business Administration, or (2) in the process of being
organized. The OCC has previously interpreted this authority to permit
a national bank to invest in a SBIC that is in the process of being
organized.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 832 (June 18, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letters of Credit and Independent Undertakings (Sec. 7.1016)
The OCC proposes to amend 12 CFR 7.1016, which provides that a
national bank may issue letters of credit and other independent
undertakings to customers, to include Federal savings associations.
Section 7.1016 provides that a national bank entering into an
independent undertaking should not expose itself to undue risk and also
outlines certain safety and soundness considerations for these
activities. Specifically, Sec. 7.1016 provides that a national bank
should consider at a minimum: (1) Whether the terms make clear the
independence of the undertaking; (2) whether the amount of the
undertaking is limited; (3) whether the undertaking is limited in
duration or, if not, whether the bank has an ability to end the
undertaking or demand cash collateral from the applicant; and (4)
whether the undertaking will be collateralized or include a
reimbursement right. Section 7.1016 also provides that certain
undertakings require particular protections against credit,
operational, and market risk and outlines the protections a bank should
or must take in specific circumstances.\31\ Section 7.1016 further
provides that the national bank should possess operational expertise
that is commensurate with the sophistication of its independent
undertaking activities. Finally, Sec. 7.1016 requires a bank to
accurately reflect its undertakings in its records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Specifically, Sec. 7.1016(b)(2) provides that: (1) If the
undertaking is to honor by delivery of an item of value other than
money, the bank should ensure that market fluctuations affecting the
value of the item will not cause the bank to assume undue market
risk; (2) if the undertaking provides for automatic renewal, the
terms for renewal should be consistent with the bank's ability to
make any necessary credit assessments prior to renewal; and (3) if a
bank issues an undertaking for its own account, the underlying
transaction for which it is issued must be within the bank's
authority and must comply with any safety and soundness requirements
applicable to that transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Sec. 160.50, a Federal savings association may issue
letters of credit and may issue other independent undertakings as are
approved by the OCC, subject to the restrictions in Sec. 160.120.
Section 160.120 contains provisions that are largely similar to the
provisions applicable to national banks in Sec. 7.1016.\32\ However,
Sec. Sec. 160.50 and 160.120 provide that, unless it is a letter of
credit, a Federal savings association only may issue independent
undertakings that have been approved by the OCC. The OTS explained when
it updated its regulation that Federal savings associations were not
traditionally involved in international banking transactions, which
utilized these independent undertakings, as were national banks.\33\
The OTS stated that the approval requirement provided ``the appropriate
balance between giving thrifts greater flexibility to potentially
engage in new types of transactions while at the same time ensuring
that thrifts have properly evaluated the risks posed by a particular
transaction consistent with prudent banking practice.'' \34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See 61 FR 50951, 50958 (Sept. 30, 1996).
\33\ Id.
\34\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.1016 to apply it to Federal
savings associations, and to remove Sec. Sec. 160.50 and 160.120,
because of the similarities between the national bank and Federal
savings association independent undertaking regulations. As a result, a
Federal savings association would no longer be limited to issuing non-
letter of credit independent undertakings approved by the OCC. The
industry's rules of practice have improved since the former OTS
promulgated the regulation in 1996. In addition, the operations of
Federal savings associations have evolved over the past two decades and
those Federal savings associations that issue independent undertakings
are familiar with non-letters of credit independent undertakings and
related supervisory expectations. Furthermore, the OCC expects national
banks and Federal savings associations to have operational expertise
commensurate with the sophistication of its letters of credit or
independent undertaking activities.\35\ The OCC believes that this
expectation is sufficient to ensure that all OCC-supervised
institutions properly evaluate the risks associated with these
activities. For these reasons, the OCC finds that the OCC approval
requirement for non-letter of credit independent undertakings issued by
Federal savings associations is no longer necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ 12 CFR 7.1016(b)(3) and 12 CFR 160.120(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC also is proposing to clarify that Federal branches and
agencies of foreign banks may issue letters of credit and other
independent undertakings, consistent with the conditions outlined in
Sec. 7.1016.\36\ Finally, the OCC is proposing technical changes to
the footnote to reflect updates to the laws and rules of practice
cited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Section 4(b) of the International Banking Act, 12 U.S.C.
3102(b) (Pub. L. 95-369) provides that the operations of a foreign
bank at a Federal branch or agency shall be conducted with the same
rights and privileges as a national bank at the same location and
shall be subject to all the same duties, restrictions, penalties,
liabilities, conditions, and limitations that would apply under the
National Bank Act to a national bank doing business at the same
location. See also 12 CFR 28.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Bank Participation in Financial Literacy Programs (Sec.
7.1021)
Twelve CFR 7.1021 provides that a national bank may participate in
a financial literacy program on the premises of, or at a facility used
by, a school. Section 7.1021 also provides that the school premises or
facility will not be considered a branch of the bank if: (1) The bank
does not establish and operate the school premises or facility on which
the financial literacy program is conducted; and (2) the principal
purposes of the program is educational.
The OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.1021 to clarify that the
purpose of this section is whether the facilities or premises used for
such a program would be considered a branch of the national bank under
12 U.S.C. 36. Facilities or premises are only considered to be branches
of a national bank if they are established and operated by the national
bank. The proposal also would provide that the OCC considers the
establishment and operation in this
[[Page 40799]]
context on a case by case basis, considering the facts and
circumstances. However, the OCC has previously determined \37\ that
whether a financial literacy program is a branch under section 36 may
be evaluated under the safe harbor test for messenger services
established by third parties set forth in Sec. 7.1012(c)(2) and that a
premises or facility used for a school savings program is clearly
established by a third party if it meets this safe harbor test. The
proposal would codify this interpretation by providing that a premises
is not a branch of the national bank if the safe harbor test in Sec.
7.1012(c)(2) applicable to messenger services established by third
parties is satisfied and that the factor discussed in Sec.
7.1012(c)(2)(i), regarding whether the bank employs the person who
provide the service, can be met if bank employee participation in the
financial literacy program consists of managing the program or
conducting or engaging in financial education activities provided the
school or other community organization retains control over the program
and over the premises or facilities at which the program is held. The
OCC believes that this should provide clarity with respect to the
meaning of ``establish and operate'' in Sec. 7.1021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 839 (August 3, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with current practice, the OCC also is expanding the
scope of financial literacy programs beyond schools to encompass other
community-based organizations, such as non-profit organizations, that
provide financial literacy programs. In addition, the OCC is moving the
definition of financial literacy program to the beginning of the
section to clarify that, while a financial literacy program is a
program for which the primary purpose is educational, this is not a
factor in determining whether the premises or facility is a branch for
purposes of section 36.
The OCC is not adding Federal savings associations to this section
because they are not subject to the branching requirements in section
36. However, the OCC notes that participation in financial literacy
programs is a permissible activity for both national banks and Federal
savings associations.
National Banks' Authority To Buy and Sell Exchange, Coin, And Bullion
(Sec. 7.1022)
Federal Savings Associations, Prohibition on Industrial or Commercial
Metal Dealing or Investing (Sec. 7.1023)
The OCC also is proposing a technical change to Sec. Sec. 7.1022
and 7.1023. Section 7.1022 prohibits a national bank from acquiring or
selling industrial or commercial metal for purposes of dealing or
investing. Section 7.1022 excludes industrial and commercial metals
from the national bank authority to ``buy and sell exchange, coin, and
bullion.'' Section 7.1023 similarly prohibits a Federal savings
association from dealing or investing in industrial or commercial
metal. Both sections require a national bank and a Federal savings
association to dispose of any industrial or commercial metal held as a
result of dealing or investing in that metal as soon as practicable,
but not later than one year from the effective date of the regulation.
The OCC may grant up to four separate one-year extensions if the bank
makes a good faith effort to dispose of the metal and the retention of
the metal for an additional year is not inconsistent with the safe and
sound operation of the bank. The OCC is proposing a technical change to
both sections to replace the words ``one year from the effective date
of this regulation'' with the actual effective date of that final rule,
April 1, 2018.
Tax Equity Finance Transactions (New Sec. 7.1025)
The OCC and the courts have long held that a national bank may use
its 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) lending authority to engage in transactions
that do not take the form of a traditional loan to accommodate the
demands of the market, provided the transaction is the functional
equivalent of a loan.\38\ The OCC has interpreted this authority to
permit a national bank to engage in tax equity finance (TEF)
transactions.\39\ Although the OCC has not previously addressed the
permissibility of TEF transactions for a Federal savings association,
OCC regulations authorize a Federal savings association to engage in
loan equivalent transactions pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1464,\40\ and the
former OTS permitted a Federal savings association to participate in
certain transactions in order to receive tax credits and other tax
benefits.\41\ The OCC is proposing to codify and clarify these
interpretations of 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) and 1464 in new Sec.
7.1025.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See M & M Leasing Corp. v. Seattle First Nat'l Bank, 563
F.2d 1377 (9th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 956 (1978). See
also OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1048 (Dec. 21, 2005); Corporate
Decision 99-07 (March 26, 1999); Corporate Decision 98-17 (March 27,
1998); Interpretive Letter No. 867 (June 1, 1999).
\39\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1048 (Dec. 21, 2005), OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1139 (Nov. 13, 2013), OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 1141 (Apr. 22, 2014). See also 26 U.S.C. 48 (energy ITC)
and 26 U.S.C. 45 (energy PTC). Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules
govern tax credit availability.
\40\ 12 CFR 160.41 (Leasing).
\41\ See, e.g., OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (Feb. 9, 2004) (New Market
Tax Credit Program) and OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (Nov. 10, 1994) (low-
income housing tax credit partnership).
\42\ A national bank or Federal savings association may be able
to participate in TEF transactions under an alternative authority,
including community development and public welfare investment
authority under 12 U.S.C. 24(Eleventh) and 12 CFR 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Sec. 7.1025(a) would permit a national bank and Federal
savings association to engage in a TEF transaction pursuant to 12
U.S.C. 24(Seventh) and 1464 if the transaction is the functional
equivalent of a loan, as provided in proposed paragraph (c), and if a
TEF transaction satisfies the requirements of proposed paragraph (d).
Proposed Sec. 7.1025(b) would define a ``tax equity finance
transaction'' as a transaction in which a national bank or Federal
savings association provides equity financing to fund a project that
generates tax credits and other tax benefits and the use of an equity-
based structure allows the transfer of those credits to the bank or
savings association. Paragraph (b) also would define ``capital and
surplus'' by cross-referencing to its definition in the OCC's lending
limit rule, 12 CFR 32.\43\ As defined in the lending limit rule, for
qualifying community banking organizations that have elected to use the
community bank leverage ratio framework, as set forth under the OCC's
Capital Adequacy Standards at 12 CFR part 3, ``capital and surplus''
means a qualifying community banking organization's tier 1 capital, as
used under 12 CFR 3.12, plus a qualifying community banking
organization's allowance for loan and lease losses or adjusted
allowances for credit losses, as applicable, as reported in the
Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income (Call Report). For all
other national banks and Federal savings associations, ``capital and
surplus'' means a national bank's or savings association's tier 1 and
tier 2 capital, calculated under the risk-based capital standards
applicable to the institution as reported in the Call Report, plus the
[[Page 40800]]
balance of a national bank's or Federal savings association's allowance
for loan and lease losses or adjusted allowances for credit losses, as
applicable, not included in the bank's or savings association's tier 2
capital, for purposes of the calculation of risk-based capital, as
reported in the national bank's or savings association's Call Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ The OCC recently amended the definition of ``capital and
surplus'' in 12 CFR 32.2 in its recent community bank leverage ratio
rule. See 84 FR 61776 (November 13, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under proposed paragraph (c), a TEF transaction would qualify as
the functional equivalent of a loan if it meets eight requirements that
derive from OCC interpretations. First, the TEF transaction structure
must be necessary for making the tax credits and other tax benefits
available to the national bank or Federal savings association. The OCC
requests comment on whether national banks or Federal savings
associations routinely obtain legal opinions regarding the availability
of tax credits in connection with these types of finance transactions.
Second, the TEF transaction must be of limited tenure and not
indefinite. Under this requirement, a national bank or Federal savings
association would need to be able to achieve its targeted return in a
reasonable time, and the TEF transaction would need to have a defined
termination point. A national bank or Federal savings association could
satisfy this requirement if the TEF transaction will terminate within a
reasonable time of the transaction's initiation or if a project sponsor
has an option to purchase a national bank's or Federal savings
association's interest at or near fair market value. The national bank
or Federal savings association cannot control whether it retains the
interest indefinitely. The proposed rule would permit a national bank
or Federal savings association to retain a limited investment interest
if that interest is required by law to obtain continuing tax benefits
from the TEF transaction.
Third, the tax benefits and other payments received by the national
bank or Federal savings association from the TEF transaction must repay
the investment and provide an implied rate of return. As a result of
this proposed requirement, the national bank's or Federal savings
association's underwriting could not place undue reliance on the value
of any residual stake in the project and the proceeds of disposition
following the expiration of the tax credits' compliance period.
Fourth, the national bank or Federal savings association must not
rely on appreciation of value in the project or property rights
underlying the project for repayment. As discussed in OCC Interpretive
Letter 1139, wind turbines, solar panels, and other ancillary equipment
are not considered real property under 12 U.S.C. 29, and acquisition of
interests in real estate incidental to the provision of financing is
not inconsistent with 12 U.S.C. 29.
Fifth, the national bank or Federal savings association must use
underwriting and credit approval criteria and standards that are
substantially equivalent to the underwriting and credit approval
criteria and standards used for a traditional commercial loan. To
comply with this requirement, the documents governing the TEF
transaction should contain terms and conditions equivalent to those
found in documents governing typical lending relationships and
transactions.
Sixth, the national bank or Federal savings association must be a
passive investor in the transaction and must be unable to direct the
affairs of the project company. This means that the national bank or
Federal savings association would not be able to direct day-to-day
operations of the project. However, the OCC would not consider
temporary management activities in the context of foreclosure or
similar proceedings as violating this requirement.
Seventh, the national bank or Federal savings association must
appropriately account for the transaction initially and on an ongoing
basis and document contemporaneously its accounting assessment and
conclusion. Although TEF transactions can be the functional equivalent
of loans pursuant to a national bank's or Federal savings association's
lending authority, the accounting treatment of tax equity investments
may differ from being a loan.
Proposed paragraph (d) would provide that a national bank or
Federal savings association only could engage in TEF transactions if it
meets the following four additional requirements. First, the national
bank or Federal savings association cannot control the sale of energy,
if any, from the project. To satisfy this requirement, a national bank
or Federal savings association could enter into a long-term contract
with creditworthy counterparties to sell energy from the project, as
articulated in OCC Interpretive Letter 1139, or have the project
sponsor bear responsibility for selling generated power into the energy
market so long as those sales are stabilized by a hedge contract that
provides reasonable price and cash flow certainty, as articulated in
OCC Interpretive Letter 1141.
Second, the national bank or Federal savings association must limit
the total dollar amount of TEF transactions to no more than five
percent of its capital and surplus unless the OCC determines, by
written approval of a written request by the national bank or Federal
savings association to exceed the five percent limit, that a higher
aggregate limit will not pose an unreasonable risk to the national bank
or Federal savings association and that the tax equity finance
transactions in the national bank's or Federal savings association's
portfolio will not be conducted in an unsafe or unsound manner. In no
case may a bank's or FSA's total dollar amount of TEF transactions
exceed fifteen percent of its capital and surplus. As provided for
public welfare investments under 12 U.S.C. 24(Eleventh) and 12 CFR 24,
a national bank is generally subject to a five percent aggregate
investment limit and this limit encourages a national bank to maintain
appropriate risk diversification.\44\ The OCC specifically requests
comment on whether the OCC should use an alternate measure when
calculating the aggregate investment limit and whether the proposed
five percent aggregate investment limit is appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 12 U.S.C. 24(Eleventh); 12 CFR 24.4(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, the national bank or Federal savings association has
provided written notification to the OCC prior to engaging in each TEF
transaction that includes its evaluation of the risks posed by the
transaction.
Fourth, the national bank or Federal savings association can
identify, measure, monitor, and control the associated risks of its tax
equity finance transaction activities individually and as a whole on an
ongoing basis to ensure that it conducts such activities in a safe and
sound manner.
Proposed paragraph (e) would provide that the TEF transaction must
be subject to the substantive legal requirements of a loan, including
the lending limits prescribed by 12 U.S.C. 84, as implemented by 12 CFR
32, and, if the active investor or project sponsor of the transaction
is an affiliate of the national bank or Federal savings association,
the restrictions on transactions with affiliates prescribed by 12
U.S.C. 371c and 371c-1, as implemented by 12 CFR 223. If a national
bank or Federal savings association is relying on its lending authority
to participate in a TEF transaction, the TEF transaction would be
subject to regulatory requirements applicable to loans, including any
applicable legal lending limits and affiliate transaction restrictions
to the extent applicable. However, the regulatory capital treatment of
a national bank or Federal savings association's participation in a TEF
transaction would be determined
[[Page 40801]]
according to the regulatory capital rule (12 CFR part 3).
The OCC specifically requests comment on whether the final rule
should prohibit a national bank or Federal savings association from
entering into TEF transactions for projects involving residential
installation TEF transactions not involving utility-scale standalone
power-generation facilities. The OCC also requests comment on whether
the final rule should permit national banks or Federal savings
associations to invest in TEF transactions involving detached single-
family residences, multi-family residences, or non-utility commercial
buildings. Further, the OCC requests comment on whether national banks
and Federal savings associations should have other contractual remedies
available before entering into a TEF transaction. For example, should
the final rule require national banks or Federal savings associations
to have the option to replace the sponsor or manager of a project under
certain conditions or be required to have indemnifications for breaches
of tax representations or other legal risks? In the alternative, should
a final rule require a project sponsor or the sponsor's parent to make
or guarantee such an indemnification? The OCC also requests comment on
whether national banks and Federal savings associations are currently
participating in TEF transactions through fund-based structures, and,
if not, whether national banks and Federal savings associations want to
participate in TEF transactions through fund-based structures. Further,
the OCC requests comment on whether there are additional issues related
to fund-based structures and whether the final rule should include
additional safeguards related to fund-based structures.
Payment System Memberships (New Sec. 7.1026)
Section 7.1026 Payment System Memberships. The OCC has long
recognized the authority of national banks to become members of payment
systems.\45\ Similarly, OTS precedent permits Federal savings
associations to join payment systems.\46\ In 2014, the OCC published a
legal interpretive letter clarifying that national banks may join
payment systems with approval from the OCC even when the national bank
would be exposed to potentially open-ended liability as a member of the
payment system.\47\ This interpretive letter also outlined the approval
process for this membership. In a subsequent interpretive letter, the
OCC modified the process to remove the approval requirement.\48\ To
provide additional clarity to national banks, the OCC is proposing to
add a new Sec. 7.1026 to part 7 that would codify the current process
for joining a payment system. The OCC also is proposing to apply this
section to Federal savings associations to provide equal treatment to
Federal savings associations. The OCC continues to support national
banks and Federal savings associations performing their critical roles
in payment systems--including as members and architects. The proposal
reminds national banks and Federal savings associations of their
responsibility for ensuring that payment system membership is conducted
in a safe and sound manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ See, e.g., OCC Conditional Approval Letter No. 220 (Dec. 2,
1996); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 993 (May 16, 1997).
\46\ See, e.g., 12 CFR 145.17; OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (Sept. 15,
1995); OTS Op. Ch. Couns. (Dec. 22, 1995).
\47\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1140 (Jan. 13, 2014).
\48\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1157 (Nov. 12, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definitions. Proposed Sec. 7.1026(a) would provide definitions for
several terms used throughout the proposed new section. First, the
proposal would define ``appropriate OCC supervisory office'' as the OCC
office that is responsible for the supervision of a national bank or
Federal savings association, as described in subpart A of 12 CFR part
4.
Second, because different payment systems may use different
terminology, the OCC is proposing to define ``member'' to include a
national bank or Federal savings association designated as a
``member,'' a ``participant,'' or other similar role by a payment
system, including by a payment system that requires the national bank
or Federal savings association to share in operational losses or
maintain reserves with the payment system to offset potential liability
for operational losses. The OCC requests comment on whether the
definition of ``member'' should include national banks and Federal
savings associations who are indirect members of a payment system.
Third, the rules of some payment systems may not place a cap on the
operational liability of its members, but a member's operational
liability may be capped in some other way. For example, a jurisdiction
could have a law that does not permit open-ended liability. If that law
applies to the payment system, it could effectively cap a member's
operational liability. In other situations, a member may negotiate a
separate agreement with a payment system that allows the member to
limit its potential liability and, as a result, the risks of membership
in that payment system. To address these situations, the OCC is
proposing to define ``open-ended liability'' as liability for
operational losses that is not capped under the rules of the payment
system and includes indemnifications provided to third parties as a
condition of membership in the payment system. For example, national
banks and Federal savings associations may provide open-ended
indemnifications to Federal Reserve Banks as a condition of membership
in particular payment systems.\49\ This proposed definition is
consistent with the definition of open-ended liability in OCC
Interpretive Letter 1140.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourth, although memberships in payment systems expose national
banks and Federal savings associations to a variety of risks, OCC legal
precedent only has addressed whether a national bank may assume open-
ended liability for operational losses at the payment system. Thus, the
OCC is proposing to define ``operational loss'' as a charge resulting
from sources other than defaults by other members of the payment
system. Examples of these operational losses would be losses that are
due to: Employee misconduct, fraud, misjudgment, or human error;
management failure; information systems failures; disruptions from
internal or external events that result in the degradation or failure
of services provided by the payment system; or payment or settlement
delays, constrained liquidity, contagious disruptions, and resulting
litigation. These examples are listed in OCC Interpretive Letter
1140.\50\ The OCC requests comment as to whether these examples should
be included in this definition. If these examples should be included,
the OCC also requests comment as to whether the examples listed are
appropriate and whether the list is sufficiently comprehensive or
whether other examples should be included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1140.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the OCC recognizes that payment systems transfer funds for
a variety of purposes and in varying amounts. For example, wholesale
payment systems typically process large dollar transfers while retail
payment systems may process a higher volume of transactions at a lower
average dollar figure.\51\ The OCC proposes to define ``payment
system'' in Sec. 7.1026 to mean a ``financial market utility'' as
defined
[[Page 40802]]
in 12 U.S.C. 5462(6), wherever it operates. This definition would
therefore include payment systems that operate either in the U.S. or in
a foreign jurisdiction. Section 5462(6) provides that ``a financial
market utility'' means ``any person that manages or operates a
multilateral system for the purpose of transferring, clearing, or
settling payments, securities, or other financial transactions among
financial institutions or between financial institutions and the
person'' with certain exclusions.\52\ but would exclude derivatives
clearing organizations registered under the Commodity Exchange Act and
clearing agencies registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and foreign organizations that would be considered a derivatives
clearing organization or clearing agency were it operating in the
United States. The OCC requests comment on whether to include a
definition of payment system and, if so, whether this definition and
the three exclusions listed are appropriate. The OCC also requests
comment on whether the definition appropriately encompasses both
foreign and domestic payment systems that national banks and Federal
savings associations may join, including whether the proposed language
properly excludes foreign equivalents of U.S.-registered derivatives
clearing organizations and U.S.-registered clearing agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ FFIEC IT Examination Handbook, Retail Payment Systems at 2
(Apr. 2016).
\52\ Financial market utility ``does not include: designated
contract markets, registered futures associations, swap data
repositories, and swap execution facilities registered under the
Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), or national securities
exchanges, national securities associations, alternative trading
systems, security-based swap data repositories, and swap execution
facilities registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78a et seq.), solely by reason of their providing facilities
for comparison of data respecting the terms of settlement of
securities or futures transactions effected on such exchange or by
means of any electronic system operated or controlled by such
entities, provided that the exclusions in this clause apply only
with respect to the activities that require the entity to be so
registered'' nor ``any broker, dealer, transfer agent, or investment
company, or any futures commission merchant, introducing broker,
commodity trading advisor, or commodity pool operator, solely by
reason of functions performed by such institution as part of
brokerage, dealing, transfer agency, or investment company
activities, or solely by reason of acting on behalf of a financial
market utility or a participant therein in connection with the
furnishing by the financial market utility of services to its
participants or the use of services of the financial market utility
by its participants, provided that services performed by such
institution do not constitute critical risk management or processing
functions of the financial market utility.'' 12 U.S.C. 5462(6)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice requirements. Proposed Sec. 7.1026(c) would require a
national bank or Federal savings association to provide written notice
to the appropriate OCC supervisory office 30 days prior to joining a
payment system that would expose it to open-ended liability. If the
payment system does not expose the national bank or Federal savings
association to open-ended liability, the proposed rule would require
the national bank or Federal savings association instead to provide
after-the-fact written notice within 30 days of becoming a member of
the payment system. The OCC believes membership in a payment system
that exposes members to open-ended liability creates additional risks
for national banks and Federal savings associations. Thus, the OCC
believes prior notice to the OCC is appropriate in these
situations.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ The proposed notice requirement would not apply to existing
payment system memberships. However, as explained below, the
proposed rule would require national banks and Federal savings
associations to continuously inform the OCC of changes to bank
operations that would affect the institution's risk profile. Thus,
the OCC would be made aware of any payment system membership at a
bank or savings association even though the specific timing and
information required by this proposed rule would not apply to
existing payment systems memberships.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content of notice. Proposed Sec. 7.1026(d) would provide that all
notices filed under Sec. 7.1026 must include representations that the
national bank or Federal savings association has complied with the
safety and soundness review required by proposed Sec. 7.1026(e)(1)
before joining the payment system and will comply with the safety and
soundness review and the notification requirements in proposed Sec.
7.1026(e)(2) and (e)(3) after joining the system. For after-the-fact
notices pursuant to paragraph (c)(2), the proposed rule would require a
national bank or Federal savings association to include a
representation that either the rules of the payment system do not
impose liability for operational losses on members or that the national
bank's or Federal savings association's liability for operational
losses is limited by the rules of the payment system to specific and
appropriate limits that do not exceed the legal lending limit specified
by 12 CFR part 32 or a lower limit established for the national bank or
Federal savings association by the OCC.
Safety and soundness procedures. The OCC relies upon a number of
resources to communicate in detail its safety and soundness guidance
for national bank and Federal savings association memberships in
payment systems.\54\ At a minimum, the OCC believes a national bank or
Federal savings association must be able to identify, evaluate, and
control its risks from membership in a particular payment system both
before joining the system and on an ongoing basis.\55\ Proposed Sec.
7.1026(e) would require as a prerequisite to joining a payment system
and on a continual basis after joining that the national bank or
Federal savings association: (1) Identify and evaluate the risks posed
by membership in the payment system, taking into account whether the
liability is limited, and (2) measure, monitor, and control those
risks. To assist with these requirements in paragraph (e), national
banks and Federal savings associations should review the standards
outlined in OCC Interpretive Letter 1140 and OCC Banking Circular 235.
The proposal also requires a national bank or Federal savings
association to notify the appropriate OCC supervisory office if its
ongoing risk management identifies a safety and soundness concern, such
as a material change to the bank's or savings association's liability
or indemnification responsibilities, as soon as that concern is
identified and to take appropriate actions to remediate the risk. The
OCC requests comment on whether to include any of the criteria outlined
in OCC Interpretive Letter 1140 and OCC Banking Circular 235 related to
the analysis of: (1) The payment system and its membership criteria and
(2) criteria for an effective risk management program to the safety and
soundness requirements in paragraph (e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See, e.g., FFIEC IT Examination Handbook on Retail Payment
Systems (Apr. 2016); FFIEC IT Examination Handbook on Wholesale
Payment Systems (July 2004); Comptroller's Handbook: Payment Systems
and Funds Transfer Activities (March 1990); OCC Banking Circular 235
(May 10, 1989).
\55\ For example, OCC Banking Circular 235 states ``Management
of each national bank is responsible for assessing risk in each
payment, clearing, and settlement system in which the bank
participates. Management must adopt adequate policies, procedures,
and controls with respect to these activities.'' The OCC applied
this Banking Circular to Federal savings associations on Oct. 1,
2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC recognizes that a national bank's or Federal savings
association's liability will vary from payment system to payment
system. For example, the rules of some payment systems may expose
members to open-ended liability for operational losses but, in reality,
the national bank's or Federal savings association's liability is
limited by separately negotiated agreements, controlling laws of the
jurisdiction, or some other means. Therefore, the proposal also would
permit a national bank or Federal savings association to consider its
open-ended liability to a particular payment system to be limited for
purposes of the review required by proposed Sec. 7.1026(e)(1) and (2)
if the
[[Page 40803]]
bank or savings association obtains an independent legal opinion prior
to joining the payment system. That legal opinion must describe how the
payment system allocates liability for operational losses and conclude
the potential liability for the national bank or Federal savings
association is limited to specific and appropriate limits that do not
exceed the legal lending limit specified by 12 CFR part 32 or a lower
limit established for the national bank or Federal savings association
by the OCC. This legal opinion would enable the OCC to verify that the
liability of the national bank or Federal savings association is
limited even though the rules of the payment system do not provide any
limits. If there are material changes to the liability or
indemnification requirements of the national bank or Federal savings
association after the bank or savings association joins the payment
system, it can no longer rely on that legal opinion to demonstrate that
its liability is limited and must notify the OCC and remediate its
risks as described in Sec. 7.1026(e)(3).
Establishment and Operation of a Remote Service Unit by a National Bank
(New Sec. 7.1027/Sec. 7.4003)
Section 7.4003 provides that a bank can establish and operate a
remote service unit (RSU) pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh). This
section further states that an RSU does not constitute a branch under
12 U.S.C. 36(j) and is not subject to State geographic or operational
restrictions or licensing laws. Section 7.4003 defines an RSU as an
automated facility, operated by a customer of a bank, that conducts
banking functions such as receiving deposits, paying withdrawals, or
lending money. This section provides examples of an RSU, specifically
listing an automated teller machine (ATMs), automated loan machine,
automated device for receiving deposits, personal computer, telephone,
and other similar electronic devices. Finally, this section notes that
an RSU may be equipped with a telephone or tele-video device that
allows contact with bank personnel.
The OCC has historically treated drop boxes as branches based on
the 1969 Supreme Court case First National Bank in Plant City, Florida
v. Dickinson, 396 U.S. 122 (1969) (Plant City). In Plant City, the
Supreme Court ruled that a drop box operated by a national bank
constituted a branch under 12 U.S.C. 36(j) because it was a place ``at
which deposits are received.'' \56\ However, in 1996, Congress amended
the definition of ``branch'' in 12 U.S.C. 36(j) to provide that ``[t]he
term `branch,' as used in this section, does not include an automated
teller machine or a remote service unit.'' \57\ Thus, the holding in
Plant City is legislatively overruled with respect to any banking
facility that is an ATM or an RSU.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ Plant City, 396 U.S. 122 at 137.
\57\ Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of
1996 (EGRPRA), Public Law 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009, Section 2204
(1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted, the current definition of ``RSU'' in Sec. 7.4003
requires an RSU to be automated.\58\ However, upon further
consideration, the OCC believes that interpreting both the terms ATM
and RSU to require automation leads to incongruous results whereby a
non-automated facility such as a drop box is considered a branch
whereas an automated facility such as an ATM is not, despite a drop box
functioning less like a full branch than an ATM. Furthermore, the OCC
finds that drop boxes have more in common with the types of devices
already considered RSUs than with full-service branches and therefore
are more appropriately classified as RSUs. Accordingly, the OCC is
proposing to amend Sec. 7.4003 to expand the definition of an RSU to
include either an automated or unstaffed facility and to add drop boxes
to the list of RSU examples. This would allow unstaffed facilities,
such as drop boxes, to receive the same branching treatment as ATMs and
other devices already classified as RSUs such as computers and
automated loan machines. This amendment would provide national banks
with a significant degree of flexibility and burden relief in the
establishment of drop boxes. We note that if the OCC finalizes this
amendment, it also will amend 12 CFR 5.30(d) to remove ``drop box''
from the definition of ``branch.'' Because the OCC is proposing changes
to this definition in another rulemaking,\59\ the OCC has not proposed
this technical amendment in this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ In 1997, the OCC issued an interpretive letter which
explained that the OCC did not view a drop box to be an RSU because
they are not automated. OCC Interpretive Letter No. 772 (March 6,
1997).
\59\ See Articles of Association, Charters, and Bylaw Amendments
(Forms), Comptroller's Licensing Manual (June 19, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC also is proposing to move Sec. 7.4003 to subpart A of part
7 as new Sec. 7.1027. This change would place it in the same subpart
as other interpretations regarding branching and non-branching
functions, thereby improving the organization of part 7.
Establishment and Operation of a Deposit Production Office by a
National Bank (New Sec. 7.1028/Sec. 7.4004)
Section 7.4004 provides that a national bank or its operating
subsidiary may engage in deposit production activities at a site other
than the main office or a branch of the bank, and further provides that
a deposit production office (DPO) may solicit deposits, provide
information about deposit products, and assist persons in completing
application forms and related documents to open a deposit account.
Section 7.4004 specifically states that a DPO is not a branch so long
as the site does not receive deposits, pay withdrawals, or make loans.
It further states that all deposit and withdrawal transactions of a
bank customer using a DPO must be performed by the customer, either in
person at the main office or a branch office of the bank or by mail,
electronic transfer, or a similar method of transfer. Finally, this
section states that a national bank may use the services of persons not
employed by the bank in its deposit production activities. As with
Sec. 7.4003, the OCC is proposing to move Sec. 7.4004 to subpart A of
part 7 as new Sec. 7.1028 to place it in the same subpart as other
interpretations regarding branching and non-branching functions. This
change would improve the organization of part 7. The OCC is proposing
no other changes to this section except for a non-substantive change to
its wording.
Combination of National Bank Loan Production Office, Deposit Production
Office, and Remote Service Unit (New Sec. 7.1029/Sec. 7.4005)
Section 7.4005 provides that a location at which a national bank
operates a loan production office (LPO), a DPO, and an RSU is not a
``branch'' within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. 36(j) by virtue of that
combination of operations because none of these locations individually
constitutes a branch.
The OCC is proposing to add language regarding the extent of the
permissible interaction between bank personnel and the RSU at a
facility that combines a loan production office or a deposit production
office with an RSU. The proposed addition provides that an RSU at a
combined location must be primarily operated by the customer with at
most delimited assistance from bank personnel. This language is based
on published OCC precedent.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1165 (June 28, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As with Sec. Sec. 7.4003 and 7.4004, the OCC also is proposing to
move Sec. 7.4005 to subpart A of part 7, as new Sec. 7.1029.
[[Page 40804]]
This change would place this section in the same subpart as other
interpretations regarding branching and non-branching functions. This
change would improve the organization of part 7.
Permissible Derivatives Activities for National Banks (New Sec.
7.1030)
Certain derivatives activities are permissible for national banks
under 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh). A national bank may engage in derivatives
activities that reference certain rates or assets that are permissible
for bank investment. In addition, a national bank may use derivatives
to hedge the risks of its permissible banking activities. Finally, with
prior notification to the bank's examiner-in-charge (EIC), a national
bank may engage as a financial intermediary in customer-driven
derivatives activities. Congress has recognized national banks'
authority to engage in derivatives activities in various statutes.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ See, e.g., 12 U.S.C. 84 (incorporating credit exposure from
derivatives into the legal lending limit); Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act,
Pub. L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, section 206(a)(6) (defining
``identified banking product'' to include any swap agreement except
an equity swap with a retail customer); 12 U.S.C. 371c (defining
``covered transaction'' between a bank and its affiliates to include
a derivative transaction); Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376, (Dodd-
Frank Act) section 716 (15 U.S.C. 8305); Dodd-Frank Act section 731
(7 U.S.C. 6s); Dodd-Frank Act section 764 (15 U.S.C. 78o-10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC is proposing to issue a new Sec. 7.1030 addressing
derivatives activities permissible for national banks. This new section
would incorporate and streamline the framework in OCC interpretive
letters discussing bank-permissible derivatives activities. The
proposed rule addresses five functional categories of permissible
derivatives activities: (1) Derivatives referencing underlyings a
national bank may purchase directly as an investment; (2) derivatives
with any underlying to hedge the risks arising from bank-permissible
activities; (3) derivatives with any underlying that are customer-
driven, cash-settled and either perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged;
(4) derivatives with any underlying that are customer-driven and
physically-settled by transitory title transfer; and (5) derivatives
with any underlying that are customer-driven, physically-settled (other
than by transitory title transfer), and physically-hedged.
The proposed rule also would include a requirement that a national
bank provide written notice to its EIC prior to engaging in certain
derivatives activities. This requirement would be consistent with prior
OCC interpretations that have, in connection with affirming the
permissibility of a derivatives activity in which a bank has sought to
engage, directed the bank to notify its EIC of the details of the
bank's business and management practices for performing that particular
derivatives activity as a financial intermediary. As with all
permissible activities within the business of banking, derivative
activities are subject to all other applicable laws and regulations, as
well as prudential safety and soundness standards.
The proposal is intended to describe the derivatives activities
that are legally permissible for a national bank, including activities
that require a bank to provide notice to the OCC prior to engaging in
the activity. Providing this information in a regulation is expected to
promote clarity and transparency and, ultimately, reduce compliance
burden. These proposed changes also can help ensure consistent
practices across institutions when a national bank seeks to commence or
expand derivatives activities. OCC rules for Federal savings
associations are currently set forth at 12 CFR 163.172. This rule
provides that a Federal savings association may engage in a transaction
involving a financial derivative provided that the savings association
is authorized to invest in the assets underlying the derivative, the
transaction is safe and sound, and the association's board of directors
and management satisfy certain prudential requirements. It also states
that, in general, a Federal savings association should engage in a
financial derivative transaction only to reduce its risk exposure.
Because Federal savings associations have different statutory authority
for derivative activities, the OCC has not proposed to include Federal
savings associations in Sec. 7.1030. However, the OCC is considering
moving Sec. 163.172 to part 7 so that the derivative rules for both
charters are located in the same part. This move would better organize
OCC rules. The specifics of the proposal are discussed below.
Authority. Paragraph (a) of new Sec. 7.1030 would specify that the
section is issued pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 24 (Seventh). Paragraph (a)
would further specify that a national bank may only engage in
derivatives transactions in accordance with the requirements of this
section.
Definitions. In paragraph (b), the proposed rule incorporates
several terms that are commonly used in OCC derivatives interpretive
letters. The proposed rule also defines certain terms for the first
time to promote transparency and consistency among institutions.
Customer-driven. The proposed rule would define
``customer-driven'' to mean a transaction entered into for a customer's
valid and independent business purpose. This approach is consistent
with OCC interpretive letters.\62\ This focus on the customer
recognizes that a number of derivatives activities are permissible for
a national bank because the bank is acting as a financial intermediary
for the customer. A customer-driven transaction would not include a
transaction entered into for the purpose of speculating in derivative,
currency, commodity, or security prices.\63\ Similarly, a customer-
driven transaction would not include a transaction the principal
purpose of which is to deliver to a national bank assets that the
national bank could not invest in directly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ E.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1160 (Aug. 22, 2018).
\63\ OCC interpretations have specified that customer-driven
derivatives transactions do not include transactions entered into
for the purpose of speculating in the underlying commodity or
security prices. See e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1033 (Jun.
14, 2015); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892 (September 13, 2000); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 684 (Aug. 4, 1995); OCC No-Objection Letter
90-1 (Feb. 16, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perfectly-matched. OCC interpretive letters have permitted
national banks to engage in various customer-driven, cash settled
derivatives transactions if they are perfectly-matched. In determining
that national banks may engage in perfectly-matched derivatives, the
OCC found it material that the bank would be exposed only to credit
risk.\64\ OCC interpretive letters have typically used ``perfectly-
matched'' to describe two back-to-back transactions in which all
economic terms match and in which the bank's primary exposure is credit
risk because the matched transactions offset one another's market
risk.\65\ The OCC proposes to incorporate a substantially similar
definition into the rule, with certain clarifications. Specifically,
the OCC proposes to define perfectly-matched to mean two back-to-back
transactions that offset risk with respect to all economic terms (e.g.,
amount, maturity, duration, and underlying). Consistent with OCC
interpretive letters, this definition would allow transactions to be
considered ``perfectly-matched'' despite a difference in price between
two derivatives when that difference
[[Page 40805]]
reflects the bank's intermediation fee (in the form of a spread).\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ See e.g., OCC No-Objection Letter No. 87-5 (Jul. 20, 1987).
\65\ See e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1039 (Sept. 13,
2005).
\66\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1110 (Jan. 30, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portfolio-hedged. OCC interpretive letters have discussed
the permissibility of portfolio hedging with respect to specified types
of underlyings. These letters have typically used ``portfolio-hedged''
to describe the practice of hedging the net residual risk position in a
portfolio of positions.\67\ This method of hedging can reduce
transactional costs and operational risks because fewer transactions
need to be executed relative to perfectly-matched hedging (in which the
bank must offset each transaction on an individual basis).\68\ The OCC
proposes to incorporate into the rule a substantially similar
definition with certain clarifications. Specifically, the OCC proposes
to define ``portfolio-hedged'' to mean that a portfolio of transactions
is hedged based on net unmatched positions or exposures in the
portfolio. The proposed definition refers to unmatched ``positions or
exposures'' to clarify that hedging on a portfolio basis may involve
hedging based on various risk exposures with different instruments in
accordance with applicable policies and procedures and risk limits of
the bank.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ See e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073 (Oct. 19, 2006);
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1060 (Apr. 26, 2006).
\68\ See e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1060.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physical hedging or physically-hedged. The OCC has issued
guidance recognizing that it is permissible for national banks to
utilize physical positions, including physical positions in certain
commodities, to hedge their customer-driven derivatives activities
under certain conditions.\69\ The OCC proposes to define ``physical
hedging'' and ``physically-hedged'' to mean holding title to or
acquiring ownership of an asset (for example, by warehouse receipt or
book entry) to manage the risks arising out of permissible derivatives
transactions. This definition is intended to be consistent with the
description of commodities physical hedging activities that the OCC has
identified as permissible in prior interpretive letters and in OCC
Bulletin 2015-35. This definition would also apply to physical hedging
of customer-driven derivatives referencing securities. As described
further below, OCC interpretive letters have recognized the
permissibility of physical hedging of customer-driven derivatives with
securities (i.e., taking ownership of the relevant security to hedge
the customer-driven transaction), including securities that a national
bank could not purchase as an investment under 12 CFR part 1.\70\ In
this context, consistent with prior OCC interpretations,\71\ ``physical
hedging'' involving securities would include taking ownership of a
security, by book-entry or otherwise. Section 7.1030(e) of the proposed
rule includes additional requirements applicable to physical hedging
activities.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ OCC Bulletin 2015-35, Quantitative Limits on Physical
Commodity Transactions (Aug. 4, 2015); see also OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 1040 (Sept. 15, 2005); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 935
(May 14, 2002); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684; OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 632 (Jun. 30, 1993).
\70\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1090 (Oct. 25,
2007); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1064 (Jul. 13, 2006); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1018 (Feb. 10, 2005); OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 935; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892.
\71\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1090; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1064; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1018; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 935; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892.
\72\ See proposed rule Sec. 7.1030(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physical settlement or physically-settled. OCC
interpretive letters recognize the permissibility of physical
settlement conducted as part of a national bank's derivatives financial
intermediation activities in limited circumstances. Under existing
interpretive letters and the proposed rule, engaging in physical
settlement with respect to an underlying would entail providing a
notice to the OCC.\73\ The OCC proposes to define ``physical
settlement'' and ``physically-settled'' to mean a transaction is
settled by accepting title to or acquiring ownership of the underlying
asset (whether a commodity, security, or emissions allowance). Physical
settlement stands in contrast to cash-settled transactions. In cash-
settled transactions, counterparties do not exchange the underlying
assets. Rather, they exchange cash payments based on the price of the
underlying. For purposes of the proposed rule, physical settlement
includes transitory title transfer, which is discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1040; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 935; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transitory title transfer. OCC interpretive letters
recognize the permissibility of settling a derivatives transaction by
transitory title transfer of the underlying asset in limited
circumstances. Transitory title transfer is a means of physical
settlement in which a counterparty only briefly holds title to the
underlying asset. Consistent with prior OCC interpretive letters,\74\
the OCC proposes to define ``transitory title transfer'' to mean a
transaction is settled by accepting and immediately relinquishing title
to an asset. Transitory title transfer does not entail a bank taking
physical possession of a commodity.\75\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 962 (Apr. 21, 2003).
\75\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1060; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1025 (Apr.
25, 2005); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 962; OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 684. See also 81 FR 96355 (Dec. 30, 2016) (explaining
``transitory title transfer typically does not entail physical
possession of a commodity; the ownership occurs solely to facilitate
the underlying transaction and lasts only for a moment in time.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Underlying. OCC interpretive letters have long analyzed
derivatives transactions based on the underlying reference asset, rate,
obligation, index, etc. The OCC proposes to define ``underlying'' as
the reference asset, rate, obligation, or index on which the payment
obligation(s) between counterparties to a derivatives transaction is
based.
The OCC specifically requests comment on whether the proposed
definitions accurately reflect the terms used in OCC interpretive
letters and whether any of these terms, in particular ``perfectly-
matched'' and ``portfolio-hedged,'' would benefit from further
clarification. Further, the OCC requests comment on whether national
banks would be able to determine effectively which activities meet
these definitions and, specifically, whether the OCC should elaborate
on the characteristics of transactions that will be considered
perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged. The OCC requests comment on
whether it should include a definition of the term ``derivative'' in
the final rule and whether a definition of this term would be necessary
to appropriately scope the proposed provision and whether any
definition would be workable in practice. To the extent a definition of
``derivative'' is necessary, the OCC suggests that it be defined as
follows:
A contract, agreement, swap, warrant, note, or option that is
based, in whole or in part, on the value of, any interest in, or any
quantitative measure or the occurrence of any event relating to, one or
more commodities, securities, currencies, interest or other rates,
indexes, or other assets, except a derivative does not include a:
(1) Retail forex transaction, as defined in 12 CFR 48.2;
(2) Security;
(3) Loan or loan participation;
(4) Deposit;
(5) Banker's acceptance; or
(6) Letter of credit.
The OCC requests comment on this possible definition.
Permissible Derivatives Activities Generally. The proposed rule
would address five categories of permissible derivatives activities.
These categories are discussed below.
[[Page 40806]]
Derivatives Referencing Underlyings in which a National
Bank May Invest Directly. OCC interpretive letters have recognized that
national banks may engage in derivatives activities where the
derivative references assets that a national bank could purchase
directly as an investment.\76\ For example, to manage its investment
portfolio, a national bank may use derivatives tied to interest rates,
foreign exchange and currency, credit, precious metals, and investment
securities. Section 7.1030(c)(1) of the proposed rule would reflect
this authority by specifying that a national bank may engage in
derivatives transactions with payments based on underlyings that a
national bank is permitted to purchase directly as an investment.
Paragraph (c)(1) would address only derivatives on underlyings that a
national bank would be permitted to purchase directly as principal. For
example, an underlying that a national bank could hold only as a
nonconforming investment under 12 CFR part 1 or only in satisfaction of
debts previously contracted would not be a permissible underlying under
this paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 494 (Dec. 20, 1989);
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 422 (Apr. 11, 1988); OCC No Objection
Letter No. 86-13 (Aug. 8, 1986). See also, ``Report to Congress and
the Financial Stability Oversight Council Pursuant to Section 620 of
the Dodd-Frank Act'' at 86-90 (September 2016), available at https://www.occ.treas.gov/publications-and-resources/publications/banker-education/files/pub-report-to-congress-sec-620-dodd-frank.pdf
(Section 620 Report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hedging Bank-Permissible Activities with Derivatives.
Under 12 U.S.C. 24 (Seventh), a national bank may engage in
activities that are part of, or incidental to, the business of banking.
Risk management activities, such as hedging risks arising from bank
activities, are part of the business of banking.\77\ Entering into
deposit, loan, and other contracts with customers and engaging in other
bank-permissible activities involve risks that a bank must manage as
part of the business of banking. A bank must manage the risk of those
activities to operate profitably and in a safe and sound manner.\78\ A
bank may engage in hedging activities to manage these risks.\79\ The
OCC has long recognized that a national bank may hedge its risk using
derivatives on underlyings that a national bank would be permitted to
invest in directly. For example, a national bank may use futures
contracts on exchange, coin, or bullion to hedge activities conducted
pursuant to a national bank's statutory authority to buy and sell
exchange, coin, or bullion. Similarly, a national bank may use futures
to hedge against the risk of loss due to the interest rate fluctuations
inherent in bank loan operations, U.S. Treasury Bills, and certificates
of deposit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ See Decision of the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency on the Request by Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. to Offer the
Chase Market Index Investment Deposit (1988) (MII Deposit);
Investment Company Institute v. Ludwig, 884 F. Supp. 4 (D.D.C. 1995)
(upholding Comptroller's decision that the hedged deposit in MII
Deposit is a bank-permissible product that did not violate the
Glass-Steagall Act).
\78\ See generally MII Deposit; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892.
\79\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 896 (Aug. 21, 2000); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 892.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hedging with Derivatives Referencing Underlyings in which
a National Bank May Not Invest Directly.
The OCC also has recognized that a national bank may hedge the
risks of bank-permissible activities using derivatives on underlyings
in which a national bank may not invest directly. For example, in OCC
Interpretive Letter 896, the OCC recognized that a national bank may
purchase cash-settled options on commodity futures contracts to hedge
the risk of a commodity that served as collateral on an agricultural
loan.\80\ Similarly, the OCC has recognized that it is permissible for
a trust bank to hedge the market risk associated with the fees it
received from its investment advisory activities using equity
derivatives.\81\ Likewise, the OCC has determined that a national bank
may purchase certain equity derivatives to hedge the risks of a deposit
account that paid interest based, in part, upon changes in the Standard
& Poor's 500 Composite Stock Index.\82\ The OCC also has recognized
that it is permissible for a national bank to use commodity derivatives
to hedge commodity price risk associated with a production payment
loan.\83\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 896.
\81\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1037 (Aug. 9, 2005).
\82\ See MII Deposit.
\83\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1117 (May 19, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule would recognize a national bank's authority to
hedge bank-permissible activities using derivatives on underlyings in
which a bank could not invest directly. Section 7.1030(c)(2) of the
proposed rule would provide that a national bank may engage in
derivatives transactions with any underlying to hedge the risks arising
from bank-permissible activities after providing notice to its EIC.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ In contrast, if a national bank engaged in hedging using
derivatives on underlyings in which a national bank could invest
directly, the bank would not need to provide notice under the
proposed rule because this activity could be conducted under
proposed rule Sec. 7.1030(c)(1). See proposed rule Sec.
7.1030(c)(1), (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Derivatives Financial Intermediation for Customers.
OCC interpretive letters have long recognized that a national bank
may act as a financial intermediary in customer-driven \85\ derivatives
transactions on a variety of reference assets as part of the business
of banking.\86\ These letters have recognized national banks' authority
to enter into cash-settled, customer-driven derivatives transactions
both on a perfectly-matched \87\ and portfolio-hedged basis.\88\ The
OCC has explained that these derivatives activities ``are, at their
essence, modern forms of financial intermediation'' because ``through
intermediated exchanges of payments, banks facilitate the flow of funds
within our economy and serve important financial risk management and
other financial needs of bank customers.'' \89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\85\ A ``customer-driven'' transaction is one entered into for a
customer's valid and independent business purposes. See, e.g., OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1160; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892. This
definition is addressed in Sec. 7.1030(b) of the proposed rule.
\86\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 937 (Jun. 27, 2002);
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892; No-Objection Letter 87-5.
\87\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1110 (longevity
indexes); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1101 (Jul. 7, 2008) (certain
risk indexes); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1089 (Oct. 15, 2007);
(specific property indexes); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1081 (May
15, 2007) (specific property indexes); OCC Interpretive Letter No.
1079 (Apr. 19, 2007) (inflation indexes); OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 1065 (Jul. 24, 2006) (petroleum products, agricultural oils,
grains and grain derivatives, seeds, fibers, foodstuffs, livestock/
meat products, metals, wood products, plastics and fertilizer); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1063 (Jun. 1, 2006) (hogs, lean hogs, pork
bellies, lumber, corrugated cardboard, and polystyrene); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1059 (Apr. 13, 2006) (old corrugated
cardboard #11, polypropylene: injection molding (copoly),
polypropylene: all grades, Dow Jones AIG Commodity Index); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1056 (Mar. 29, 2006) (frozen concentrate
orange juice, polypropylene); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1039
(crude oil, natural gas, heating oil, natural gasoline, gasoline,
unleaded gas, gasoil, diesel, jet fuel, jet-kerosene, residual fuel
oil, naphtha, ethane, propane, butane, isobutane, crack spreads,
lightends, liquefied petroleum gases, natural gas liquids,
distillates, oil products, coal, emissions allowances, benzene,
dairy, cattle, wheat, corn, soybeans, soybean meal, soybean oil,
cocoa, coffee, cotton, orange juice, sugar, paper, rubber, steel,
aluminum, zinc, lead, nickel, tin, cobalt, iridium, rhodium,
freight, high density polyethylene (plastic), ethanol, methanol,
newsprint, paper (linerboard), pulp (kraft), and recovered paper
(newsprint)).
\88\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073 (aluminum,
nickel, lead, zinc, and tin); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1060
(coal); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1040 (emissions allowances); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 937 (electricity).
\89\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1110; OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 1101; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1079.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40807]]
The OCC has also recognized in this context the permissibility of
physical settlement by transitory title transfer.\90\ As described
above, transitory title transfer is a particular means of physical
settlement in which a counterparty only briefly holds title to the
underlying asset. Transitory title transfer does not entail a bank
taking physical possession of a commodity.\91\ Further, the OCC has
recognized that a national bank may engage in customer-driven financial
intermediation derivatives activities that are physically-settled
(other than by transitory title transfer) and to physically hedge those
derivatives in certain circumstances.\92\ OCC interpretive letters have
explained that physical delivery can help to reduce the risk in
customer-driven commodity derivatives transactions if the activity is
conducted in accordance with safe and sound banking practices and would
achieve a more accurate and precise hedge than a cash-settled
transaction.\93\ The OCC subsequently provided guidance on safe and
sound practices with respect to physical hedges of commodity-linked
financial transactions.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\90\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1073 (aluminum, nickel,
lead, zinc, and tin); OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1060 (coal); OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 1025 (electricity); Interpretive Letter No.
962 (electricity). The term ``transitory title transfer'' means
accepting and instantaneously relinquishing title to the commodity,
as a party in a ``chain of title'' transfer. OCC Interpretive Letter
No. 1025.
\91\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1060; OCC
Interpretive Letter No. 684. See also 81 FR 96355 (Dec. 30, 2016)
(explaining ``transitory title transfer typically does not entail
physical possession of a commodity; the ownership occurs solely to
facilitate the underlying transaction and lasts only for a moment in
time.'').
\92\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1040; OCC
Interpretive Letter 892; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684.
\93\ E.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684.
\94\ See OCC Bulletin 2015-35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC proposes to incorporate and streamline the framework
contained in its interpretive letters addressing derivatives financial
intermediation activities in Sec. 7.1030(c)(3) through (5).
First, under the proposed rule, a national bank may engage in
customer-driven, cash-settled derivatives transactions on any
underlying on a perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged basis.
Second, the proposed rule would permit a national bank to engage in
customer-driven, perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged derivatives
transactions on any underlying that is settled by transitory title
transfer.
Third, the proposed rule would permit physically settled and
physically hedged transactions that are either perfectly-matched or
portfolio-hedged, provided that the national bank does not take
physical delivery of any commodity by receipt of physical quantities of
the commodity on bank premises and the physical hedging activities meet
the requirements in paragraph (e) of the proposed rule. As discussed
below, a national bank would need to provide a written notice to its
EIC before engaging in financial intermediation activities with
derivatives on underlyings in which a national bank could not invest
directly.
Relative to prior OCC interpretations, the proposed rule would make
fewer distinctions based on the particular underlying or how the
national bank hedges its derivatives financial intermediation activity.
While prior interpretations typically analyzed both the underlying and
the bank's method for hedging the customer-driven derivative (i.e.,
perfectly matched versus portfolio hedged), the proposal would permit
customer-driven, cash-settled derivatives transactions on any
underlying, whether perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged. The OCC
recognizes that financial intermediation in derivatives continues to
evolve and that the markets for derivatives on underlyings that the OCC
has not previously addressed may have sufficient liquidity and depth to
allow a bank to conduct the activity as a financial intermediary.
Similarly, the OCC recognizes that these same factors may allow a
national bank to hedge its customer-driven derivatives activities in
evolving ways--whether by portfolio hedging or physical hedging--
consistent with conducting the activity as a financial intermediary.
As with any bank-permissible activity, safety and soundness
standards apply to derivatives financial intermediation activities. The
proposal would include additional requirements for physical hedging
activities in Sec. 7.1020(e). The OCC requests comment on whether the
rule should reflect any additional standards regarding the underlyings
that are permissible for financial intermediation in derivatives and
how national banks may hedge these activities. For example, the OCC
requests comment on whether the regulation should include additional
language relating to the liquidity of the market for permissible
customer-driven derivatives activities.
Notice requirement. OCC interpretations have often included a
process in which the national bank provides notice to its EIC about the
business and management practices the bank will employ in performing
the derivatives activity as financial intermediation. Consistent with
prior interpretive letters addressing derivatives hedging or financial
intermediation activities, proposed Sec. 7.1020(d) would require a
national bank to provide written notice to its EIC prior to engaging in
activity using derivatives referencing assets that a national bank
could not invest in directly.
OCC Interpretive Letter 1160 contemplates that a bank would provide
written notification to its EIC prior to commencing a derivatives
financial intermediation business for a reference asset addressed in
prior OCC interpretive letters. This process replaced the no-objection
process that was typically included in prior OCC interpretive
letters.\95\ The proposal would require a national bank to provide a
notice to its EIC prior to commencing a financial intermediation
activity in derivatives on underlyings in which a national bank could
not invest directly or expanding its financial intermediation
activities to include a new category of underlyings.\96\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ See, e.g., OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1065.
\96\ National banks that have provided notice to or received
statements of no-objection from their EICs for particular
derivatives activities consistent with the process in OCC
interpretive letters would not be required to submit new notices for
those activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, OCC interpretive letters have contemplated that a
national bank would obtain a no-objection before engaging in hedging
activities using derivatives on underlyings in which a national bank
could not invest directly.\97\ The OCC is not proposing to incorporate
an EIC no-objection in connection with these hedging activities, and
the proposal would instead create a regulatory requirement to provide
notice to the national bank's EIC for these hedging activities
recognized in Sec. 7.1030(c)(2) through the proposed notice
requirement in Sec. Sec. 7.1030(d)(1)(i)-(ii). The OCC expects that
transitioning from the no-objection process for derivatives hedging
activities to the notice process will enhance prudential supervision of
bank derivatives activities by ensuring that banks evaluate the risks
of the activities both at inception and on an ongoing basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 896.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the proposed rule, the notice procedures and requirements in
proposed Sec. 7.1030(d)(2) would be the same for hedging activities
and financial intermediation activities. The proposed rule would
require the written notice to include information that is substantially
similar to the information that is discussed in Interpretive Letter
1160. Specifically, the written notice must
[[Page 40808]]
include a detailed description of the proposed activity, including the
relevant underlying(s); the anticipated start date of activity; and a
detailed description of the bank's risk management system (policies,
processes, personnel, and control systems) for identifying, measuring,
monitoring, and controlling the risks of the activity. The proposed
rule does not include the requirement from Interpretive Letter 1160
that the bank submitting the notice identify an OCC interpretive letter
confirming the permissibility of transactions involving the underlying
and hedging activity. If the proposed rule is finalized, derivatives
hedging and financial intermediation activities would be conducted
pursuant to the regulation, without reference to prior OCC
interpretations. Therefore, the OCC does not believe it would be
necessary for a national bank to identify a prior OCC interpretation.
The OCC believes that this framework could ultimately reduce the
compliance burden associated with national bank derivatives activities.
The proposed prior notice does not impose a prior approval
requirement. Rather, the notice is designed to make OCC supervisor
aware of a bank's derivatives activities so that such activities can be
appropriately scoped into OCC's ongoing supervision and oversight of
the bank's safety and soundness. In addition, having awareness of
bank's derivatives activities will enable the OCC to raise questions as
to whether the derivatives activity can be conducted in a safe and
sound manner, or whether the derivatives activity is within the scope
of those legally authorized for a national bank, before the bank
activities commence or at any time, as is the case with any other
permissible bank activities.
Section 7.1030(d)(1) of the proposed rule would require a national
bank to provide EIC notice prior to engaging in any of the derivatives
hedging or financial intermediation activities described in Sec.
7.1030(c)(2) through (5) for the first time. This notice requirement
would apply, for example, if a bank has previously engaged in cash-
settled derivatives with respect to a particular underlying as
described in Sec. 7.1030(c)(3) but seeks to begin physically settling
transactions as described in Sec. 7.1030(c)(4) or (5). Likewise, a
national bank would need to provide notice prior to first engaging in
derivatives hedging activities pursuant to Sec. 7.1030(c)(2) or
expanding the bank's derivatives hedging activities to include a new
category of underlying. Under proposed Sec. 7.1030(d)(2), the bank
must submit written notice at least 30 days before the national bank
commences the derivatives activity. The OCC specifically requests
comment on whether it is sufficiently clear when a notice would be
required and what would constitute a ``new category of underlying.''
Prior OCC interpretations have addressed several categories of
permissible underlyings for national bank derivatives transactions.\98\
The OCC requests comments on whether the regulation text should list
these categories. If the regulation were to list these categories, the
OCC requests comment on whether the regulation should specify that any
new derivatives activities not falling within one of the specified
categories also requires notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ See e.g., supra, note 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC believes that the proposed notice process will provide an
efficient notice standard for national banks engaging in derivatives
activities. The notice requirement is expected to enhance supervision
by providing bank supervisors with comprehensive, up-to-date
information on the activities in which the bank is engaged. This
information will assist OCC supervisors by ensuring they have an
opportunity to assess a bank's ability to engage in derivatives
activities in a safe and sound manner prior to the bank commencing the
activity and provide them ongoing information as those activities
expand to new categories. The OCC believes this objective is
particularly important in the case of derivatives hedging and financial
intermediation activities because these activities continue to evolve.
The OCC specifically requests comment on whether the final rule
should provide additional specificity regarding the notice process and
whether any additional information should be included in the notice.
Additional requirements for physical hedging activities. The OCC
has elaborated in interpretive letters and guidance on practices with
respect to physical hedging with securities and commodities.\99\ The
OCC proposes to incorporate these practices into proposed Sec.
7.1030(e) with certain modifications to promote consistency in the
practices national banks employ with respect to physical hedging
activities. Specifically, the OCC proposes to apply the framework in
interpretive letters addressing physical hedging using securities to
all physical hedging activities involving underlyings in which a
national bank could not invest directly. Under the proposed rule, a
national bank could engage in physical hedging only if: (1) The
national bank holds the underlying solely to hedge risks arising from
derivatives transactions originated by customers for the customers'
valid and independent business purposes; (2) the physical hedging
activities offer a cost-effective means to hedge risks arising from
permissible banking activities; (3) the national bank does not take
anticipatory or maintain residual positions in the underlying except as
necessary for the orderly establishment or unwinding of a hedging
position; and (4) the national bank does not acquire equity securities
for hedging purposes that constitute more than five percent of a class
of voting securities of any issuer.\100\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ See OCC Bulletin 2015-35; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 935;
OCC Interpretive Letter No. 892; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684.
\100\ Certain of the practices described in prior OCC
interpretive letters are not included in the proposed rule text
because they are generally-applicable safety and soundness standards
that can be evaluated and addressed under other existing sources of
law, including, as applicable, 12 U.S.C. 1818. For example, several
interpretive letters discuss that a national bank should have
appropriate risk management policies and procedures for its physical
hedging activities. In addition, several interpretive letters have
also specified that a bank may not engage in physical hedging
activities for the purpose of speculating in security or commodity
prices. As described above, customer-driven financial intermediation
as defined in the proposal would not include activities entered into
for the purpose of speculation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with OCC interpretive letters and guidance concerning
physical hedging with commodities in which a national bank could not
invest directly,\101\ the proposed rule would impose additional
requirements on physical hedging with commodities. Under the proposed
rule, a national bank may engage in physical hedging with commodities
only if the national bank's commodity position (including, as
applicable, delivery point, purity, grade, chemical composition,
weight, and size) is no more than five percent of the gross notional
value of the national bank's derivatives that: (1) Are in that same
particular commodity and (2) allow for physical settlement within 30
days. Title to commodities acquired and immediately sold in a
transitory title transaction would not count against this five percent
limit.\102\ Consistent with OCC interpretive letters,\103\ the proposed
rule would permit physical hedging involving commodities only if the
physical position more effectively reduces risk than a cash-settled
hedge
[[Page 40809]]
involving the same commodity. As discussed above, a national bank may
not take physical delivery of any commodity by receipt of physical
quantities of the commodity on bank premises. The proposed rule would
apply these requirements to physical hedging activities involving
commodities due to the unique risks of physical commodity
activities.\104\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\101\ See OCC Bulletin 2015-35; OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684.
\102\ Consistent with OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1040, this 5
percent limit would not apply to physical hedging using emissions
allowances.
\103\ See OCC Interpretive Letter No. 684; OCC Interpretive
Letter No. 632.
\104\ See Section 620 Report (describing the price risks and
operational risks specific to physical commodities activities).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart B--National Bank Corporate Practices
Corporate Governance (Sec. 7.2000)
As noted, the OCC continually seeks to update its regulations to
stay current with industry changes and technological advances, subject
to Federal law and consistent with the safe and sound operation of the
banking system. As part of this process, the OCC is proposing to update
and modernize Sec. 7.2000, which provides a regulatory framework for
national bank corporate governance. As described by the OCC in various
conditional approvals,\105\ ``corporate governance procedures''
generally refer to requirements involving the operation and mechanics
of the internal organization of a national bank, including relations
among owners-investors, directors, and officers, and do not include
requirements that relate to the banking powers or activities of a
national bank or relationships between a national bank and customers or
third parties. Examples of corporate governance procedures include, but
are not limited to, share exchanges, anti-takeover provisions, and the
use of blank check procedures in issuing preferred stock. The OCC
issued Sec. 7.2000 in 1996 to provide national banks with increased
flexibility to structure their corporate governance procedures
consistent with the particular needs of the bank while providing
shareholders and others with adequate notice of the corporate standards
on which a bank will rely.\106\ The OCC has not substantively changed
Sec. 7.2000 since its adoption.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ See e.g., OCC Conditional Approval No. 859 (June 13, 2008)
and OCC Conditional Approval No. 696 (June 9, 2005).
\106\ 61 FR 4849, 4854 (Feb. 9, 1996).
\107\ Non-substantive amendments to Sec. 7.2000 changed the
address and telephone number of the OCC Communications Office. See
79 FR 15641 (March 21, 2014) and 80 FR 28345 (May 18, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 7.2000 currently provides that a national bank proposing to
engage in a corporate governance procedure must comply with applicable
Federal banking statutes and regulations and safe and sound banking
practices. In addition, Sec. 7.2000 provides that to the extent not
inconsistent with applicable Federal banking statutes or regulations,
or bank safety and soundness, a national bank may elect to follow the
corporate governance procedures of the law of the State in which the
main office of the bank is located, the law of the State in which the
holding company of the bank is incorporated, Delaware General
Corporation Law, or the Model Business Corporation Act. Further, Sec.
7.2000 requires that a national bank designate in its bylaws the body
of law selected for its corporate governance procedures. Finally, Sec.
7.2000 describes the process for obtaining OCC staff positions on the
ability of a national bank to engage in a particular corporate
governance procedure.
The OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.2000 to reduce burden,
provide greater clarity, and modernize the national bank charter with
respect to corporate governance provisions. These proposed amendments
also would address anomalous results that may arise when a national
bank eliminates its holding company. As a general matter, the OCC is
proposing to change the term ``corporate governance procedure'' used in
Sec. 7.2000 to ``corporate governance provisions'' and to revise
paragraph (a) of Sec. 7.2000 accordingly. The OCC believes that
``corporate governance procedure'' may be construed too narrowly than
intended and omit corporate governance practices that are not
procedural in nature. Revised paragraph (a) would provide that the
corporate governance provisions in a national bank's articles of
association and bylaws and the bank's conduct of its corporate
governance affairs must comply with applicable Federal banking statutes
and regulations and safe and sound banking practices. The OCC does not
intend this change to affect the application of prior OCC
interpretations of corporate governance procedures to Sec. 7.2000.
The proposal would preserve the current ability of a national bank
to use the corporate governance provisions of the State in which the
main office of the bank is located, the State in which the bank's
holding company is located, the Delaware General Corporation Law, or
the Model Business Corporation Act. The proposal, however, would
increase flexibility in three ways. First, the proposal would revise
paragraph (b) of Sec. 7.2000 to authorize a national bank to elect the
corporate governance provisions of the law of any State in which any
branch of the bank is located in addition to the law of the State in
which the bank's main office is located, to the extent not inconsistent
with applicable Federal banking statutes or regulations or safety and
soundness. Accordingly, a national bank would no longer be limited to
using the corporate governance provisions of the State where its main
office is located. For example, a national bank with its main office in
State A and branches in State B and State C could elect to use the
corporate governance provisions of the law of State A, State B, or
State C.
Second, the proposal would revise paragraph (b) to authorize the
national bank to use the law of the State where a holding company of
the bank is incorporated. The proposal would expressly recognize the
possibility that a national bank may be controlled by more than one
holding company and that those holding companies may be incorporated by
different States.
Third, the proposal would add a new paragraph (c) that would allow
a national bank to continue to use the corporate governance provisions
of the law of the State where its holding company is incorporated even
if the holding company is later eliminated or no longer controls the
bank, and the national bank is not located in that State. This change
would remove an impediment to a national bank that may choose to
eliminate its holding company or is no longer controlled by that
holding company but wishes to retain longstanding and familiar
corporate governance provisions.
The OCC seeks comment on whether a national bank also should be
able to adopt a combination of corporate governance provisions from the
laws of several different States where the national bank and any
holding companies are located, thus potentially resulting in a national
bank following corporate governance provisions that derive from a
combination of States' laws, or whether a national bank should be
limited to electing and using the corporate governance provisions of a
single State. If the OCC permits a national bank to follow the
corporate governance provisions from more than one State, the OCC seeks
comment on how to ensure that shareholders and others are made aware of
the provisions that the bank has chosen.
The OCC also requests comment on whether it should make, to the
extent appropriate, similar revisions to the regulations pertaining to
corporate governance provisions for Federal savings associations in 12
CFR 5.21 and 5.22, so that Federal savings associations may elect to
use the corporate governance provisions of: (1) Any State in which the
Federal savings association is located and (2) in the case of Federal
stock savings associations,
[[Page 40810]]
the law of the State in which the association's former holding company
was incorporated. In addition, the OCC requests comment on whether the
final rule should change the term ``corporate governance procedures''
to ``corporate governance provisions'' in Sec. Sec. 5.21 and 5.22 to
be consistent with the change in terminology proposed for Sec. 7.2000.
The proposal also would revise current paragraph (c) of Sec.
7.2000 (proposed to be redesignated as Sec. 7.2000(d)). Current
paragraph (c) provides that the OCC considers requests for the OCC
staff's position on the ability of a national bank to engage in a
particular State corporate governance provision in accordance with the
no-objection procedures set forth in OCC Banking Circular 205 or any
subsequently published agency procedures, and that requests should
demonstrate how the proposed practice is not inconsistent with
applicable Federal statutes or regulations and is consistent with bank
safety and soundness. The OCC issued Banking Circular 205 on July 26,
1985 and has not modified it since. However, a national bank also may
request the views of the OCC on an interpretation of national banking
statutes and regulations through an interpretive letter, which has been
the more common approach since 1985. In order to update this paragraph,
the proposal would remove the requirement that requests for the OCC's
views on State corporate governance provisions use the no-objection
procedure. The proposal also lists the information that a request must
contain. This information, similar to what is set forth in OCC Banking
Circular 205, would include: (1) The name of the bank; (2) citations to
the State statutes or regulations involved; (3) a discussion whether a
similarly situated State bank is subject to or may adopt the corporate
governance provision; (4) identification of all Federal banking
statutes or regulations that are on the same subject as, or otherwise
have a bearing on, the subject of the proposed State corporate
governance provision; and (5) an analysis of how the proposed corporate
governance provision is not inconsistent with applicable Federal
statutes or regulations nor with bank safety and soundness. The OCC
notes that this provision would not preclude a national bank from
seeking informal consultation with OCC staff. However, if the bank
wants to receive a written response from OCC staff, it should follow
the procedure in this proposed paragraph (d).
Finally, the OCC requests comment on whether it should revise the
standard it uses to apply the requirement in Sec. 7.2000 that the
State corporate governance provision be ``not inconsistent with
applicable Federal banking statutes or regulations'' to be more
flexible. The OCC has historically viewed the standard as meaning that
State corporate governance provisions may be used unless Federal law
has a different standard than State law, in which case Federal law
controls. That is, if Federal law addresses a particular corporate
governance matter, then a national bank must follow Federal law on the
matter and cannot supplement it with State law. However, the ``not
inconsistent'' language could be interpreted in a more flexible manner.
One could view a State provision that imposed higher or more stringent
requirements as ``not inconsistent'' with Federal law because a bank
can comply with both if it meets the State's higher requirement. Thus,
the OCC could permit a bank to adopt a State corporate governance
provision under Sec. 7.2000 that imposed a higher or more stringent
standard than Federal law, as long as in complying with the State
provision the bank also would meet the requirements in Federal law. The
OCC requests comment on whether this change in the interpretation of
the ``not inconsistent'' standard would be helpful.
National Bank Adoption of Anti-Takeover Provisions (7.2001)
The OCC is proposing to add a new section Sec. 7.2001 that would
address the extent to which a national bank may include anti-takeover
provisions in its articles of association or bylaws.\108\ Anti-takeover
provisions are examples of corporate governance procedures \109\
covered by 12 CFR 7.2000. As discussed above, under current Sec.
7.2000(b) a national bank may elect to follow the corporate governance
procedures of specified State law to the extent it is (1) not
inconsistent with applicable Federal banking statutes or regulation and
(2) not inconsistent with bank safety and soundness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\ OCC regulations currently include provisions addressing
adoption of anti-takeover provisions by stock Federal savings
associations. See 12 CFR 5.22(g)(7), (h) and (j)(2)(i)(A). The OCC
is not proposing to amend those provisions.
\109\ The proposed rule would change this terminology in Sec.
7.2000 to ``corporate governance provisions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of proposed Sec. 7.2001 is to provide the OCC's views
about the permissibility of several types of anti-takeover provisions.
Specifically, proposed paragraph (a) of Sec. 7.2001 would provide that
a national bank may, pursuant to 12 CFR 7.2000(b), adopt anti-takeover
provisions included in State corporate governance law if the provisions
are not inconsistent with Federal banking statutes or regulations and
not inconsistent with bank safety and soundness.
Proposed paragraph (b) would set forth the type of anti-takeover
provisions in State corporate governance provisions that the OCC
specifically has determined are not inconsistent with Federal banking
statutes or regulations.\110\ This list is not exclusive and the OCC
may find that other State anti-takeover laws are not inconsistent with
Federal banking statutes or regulations. A national bank could elect to
follow these provisions, subject to the bank safety and soundness
limitation discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\110\ Permitting the use of staggered boards is another anti-
takeover provision. The proposed new section does not include
staggered boards because they are now expressly permitted under the
National Bank Act. 12 U.S.C. 71; 12 CFR 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restrictions on business combinations with interested shareholders.
These State provisions prohibit, or permit the corporation to prohibit
in its certificate of incorporation or other governing document, the
corporation from engaging in a business combination with an interested
shareholder or any related entity for a specified period of time (e.g.,
three years) from the date on which the shareholder first becomes an
interested shareholder (subject to certain exceptions, such as board
approval). An interested shareholder is one that owns an amount of
stock specified in the State statute, e.g., at least fifteen percent.
Federal banking statutes and regulations do not address, directly or
indirectly, this type of restriction for national banks. Although
Federal banking statutes authorize national banks to engage in
specified consolidations and mergers,\111\ this authorization does not
preclude a bank's shareholders from adopting a provision that limits
the consolidations and mergers into which the bank would enter.
Therefore, State restrictions on business combinations with interested
shareholders are not inconsistent with Federal law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ See 12 U.S.C 215, 215a, 215a-1, 215a-3, and 215c.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poison pills. A ``poison pill'' is a State statutory provision that
provides, or that permits the corporation to provide in its certificate
of incorporation or other governing document, that all shareholders,
other than the hostile acquiror, have the right to purchase additional
stock at a substantial discount upon the occurrence of a triggering
event. Because no Federal banking statutes or regulations directly or
indirectly address these shareholder
[[Page 40811]]
purchase rights, State poison pill laws are not inconsistent with
Federal law.\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\112\ However, shareholders, including the hostile acquiror,
should consider the implications under the Change in Bank Control
Act or Bank Holding Company Act if a shareholder, or shareholders
acting in concert, acquire sufficient shares to constitute
``control.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requiring all shareholder actions to be taken at a meeting. These
State provisions provide, or permit the corporation to provide in its
certificate of incorporation or other governing document, that all
actions to be taken by shareholders must occur at a meeting and
prohibit shareholders from taking action by written consent. Certain
Federal banking statutes require shareholder approval to be taken at a
meeting \113\ while other sections require shareholder approval but do
not specify a meeting.\114\ There is no provision in Federal law
authorizing national bank shareholders to take action by written
consent in lieu of a meeting. Furthermore, nothing in Federal law
precludes a national bank's articles of association from requiring a
meeting for any action. Therefore, this type of State provision is not
inconsistent with Federal law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\113\ See 12 U.S.C. 71, 214a, 215, 215a, and 215a-2.
\114\ See 12 U.S.C. 30, 51a, 57, and 59. However, 12 U.S.C. 21a
provides that any action requiring approval of the stockholders be
obtained by approval by a majority vote of the voting shares at a
meeting, unless the statutory provision addressing the action
requires greater level of approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limits on shareholders' authority to call special meetings. These
State provisions provide, or permit the corporation to provide in its
certificate of incorporation or other governing document, that only the
board of directors, and not shareholders, have the right to call
special meetings of the shareholders or, if shareholders have the
right, require a high percentage of shareholders to call the meeting.
Because Federal banking statutes or regulations do not address,
directly or indirectly, the right of shareholders of a national bank to
call special meetings, these type of State laws are not inconsistent
with Federal law.
Shareholder removal of a director only for cause. These State
provisions provide, or permit the corporation to provide in its
certificate of incorporation or other governing document, that
shareholders may remove a director only for cause, rather than both for
cause and without cause. The National Bank Act and OCC regulations do
not have a specific provision addressing director removal by
shareholders. Removal only for cause is consistent with the OCC's model
national bank Articles of Association, which provide for removal for
cause and for failure to meet statutory director qualifications.\115\
Therefore, State provisions requiring shareholder removal of a director
only for cause are not inconsistent with Federal law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\115\ See Articles of Association, Charters, and Bylaw
Amendments (Forms), Comptroller's Licensing Manual (June 19, 2017)
(Model Articles of Association, Article Fourth, last paragraph).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed paragraph (c) would set forth the type of anti-takeover
provisions in State corporate governance provisions that the OCC has
determined are inconsistent with Federal banking statutes or
regulations. A national bank could not elect to follow these
provisions. These provisions are set forth below.
Supermajority voting requirements. These State statutory provisions
require, or permit the corporation to require in its certificate of
incorporation or other governing document, that a supermajority of the
shareholders approve specified matters. A requirement that a
supermajority vote of shareholders must approve some transactions is
inconsistent with Federal law when applied to transactions for which a
Federal statute or regulation includes an express specific shareholder
approval level. Certain provisions of the National Bank Act specify
shareholder approval by a two-thirds vote \116\ and other provisions
require majority shareholder approval.\117\ When a provision in the
National Bank Act specifies the level of shareholder vote required for
approval, it is inconsistent with Federal law to follow a State
corporate governance provision that permits or requires a different
level or an additional shareholder approval requirement for a subset of
shareholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\116\ See 12 U.S.C. 30, 57, 59, 181, 214a, 215, 215a, and 215a-
2.
\117\ See 12 U.S.C. 21a and 51a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restrictions on a shareholder's right to vote all the shares it
owns. These State statutory provisions prohibit, or permit the
corporation in its certificate of incorporation or other governing
document to prohibit, a person from voting shares acquired that
increase their percentage of ownership of the company's stock above a
certain level. This type of provision is inconsistent with the National
Bank Act, which expressly provides that each shareholder is entitled to
one vote on each share of stock held by the shareholder on all matters
other than elections for directors, where cumulative voting may be
allowed if so provided in the articles of association.\118\ A State
corporate governance provision that interferes with this express right
to vote is inconsistent with Federal law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\118\ 12 U.S.C. 61.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As indicated above, Sec. 7.2000(b) permits a national bank to
elect to follow a State corporate governance provision only if it is
not inconsistent with Federal law and bank safety and soundness.
Proposed paragraph (d) of Sec. 7.2001 addresses the impact of bank
safety and soundness on adoption of anti-takeover provisions.
Anti-takeover provisions could make it harder for a bank to be
acquired by another bank or by investors or to raise capital by
discouraging share purchases by a potential acquiror. Thus, when a bank
is in a weak condition, anti-takeover provisions the OCC has determined
are not inconsistent with Federal law nevertheless would be
inconsistent with bank safety and soundness if they would impair the
possibility of restoring the bank to sound condition. These provisions
would then be impermissible.
Accordingly, proposed paragraph (d) would provide that any State
corporate governance provision, including anti-takeover provisions,
that would render more difficult or discourage an injection of capital
by purchase of bank stock, a merger, the acquisition of the bank, a
tender offer, a proxy contest, the assumption of control by a holder of
a large block of the bank's stock, or the removal of the incumbent
board of directors or management is inconsistent with bank safety and
soundness if: (1) The bank is less than adequately capitalized (as
defined in 12 CFR part 6); (2) the bank is in troubled condition (as
defined in 12 CFR 5.51(c)(7)); (3) grounds for the appointment of a
receiver under 12 U.S.C. 191 are present; or (4) the bank is otherwise
in less than satisfactory condition, as determined by the OCC.
However, proposed paragraph (d) also provides that an anti-takeover
provision is not inconsistent with bank safety and soundness if, at the
time it adopts the provision, the national bank: (1) Is not subject to
any of the foregoing conditions and (2) includes along with the
provision a limitation that the provision is not effective if one or
more of the foregoing conditions occur or if the OCC otherwise directs
the bank not to follow the provision for supervisory reasons.
Proposed paragraph (e) provides for OCC case-by-case review of
anti-takeover provisions. The OCC reviewed each type of State anti-
takeover provision described in proposed paragraph (b) for consistency
with Federal banking statutes and regulations only at a general level,
without
[[Page 40812]]
reviewing the specific terms of a proposed provision to be adopted by a
particular bank. While the OCC has concluded that the types of
provisions set out in paragraph (b) are not inconsistent with Federal
banking statutes and regulations in general, the specific provision a
particular bank adopts may contain features that could change the
result of the OCC's review. Similarly, some anti-takeover provisions
may be inconsistent with bank safety and soundness for a particular
national bank because of its individual circumstances, even if it is
not subject to the conditions listed in proposed paragraph (d).
In order to address the need for individual determinations when
appropriate, proposed paragraph (e) would provide that the OCC may
determine that a State anti-takeover provision, as proposed or adopted
by an individual national bank, is: (1) Inconsistent with Federal
banking statutes or regulations, even if it is of a type included in
paragraph (b) or (2) inconsistent with bank safety and soundness other
than as provided in paragraph (d). The OCC could begin a case-by-case
review on its own initiative. In addition, a bank that wishes the OCC
to review the permissibility of the specific State anti-takeover
provisions it has adopted or proposes to adopt may request the OCC's
review, under the procedures set forth at 12 CFR 7.2000(d).
Finally, proposed paragraph (f) addresses the method a national
bank, its shareholders, and its directors would use to adopt each anti-
takeover provision. In general, the bank would follow the requirements
for board of director and shareholder approval set out in the State
corporate governance statute it is electing to follow. However, if the
provision is included in the bank's articles of association, the bank's
shareholders would be required to approve the amendment of the articles
pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 21a, even if the State law does not require
approval by the shareholders. Further, if the State corporate
governance law requires the provision to be in the company's articles
of incorporation, certificate of incorporation, or similar document,
the national bank must include the provision in its articles of
association. If the State corporate governance law does not require the
provision to be in the company's articles of incorporation, certificate
of incorporation, or similar document but allows it to be in the
bylaws, then the national bank could include the provision in its
articles of association or in its bylaws. However, if the State
corporate governance law requires shareholder approval for changes to
the corporation's bylaws, then the national bank must include the
provision in its articles of association.
Director or Attorney as Proxy (Sec. 7.2002)
Twelve U.S.C. 61 prohibits an officer, clerk, teller, or bookkeeper
of the bank from acting as proxy for shareholder voting. Section 7.2002
codifies this prohibition in OCC regulations, and provides that any
person or group of persons, except the bank's officers, clerks,
tellers, or bookkeepers, may be designated to act as proxy. The OCC is
proposing to amend this section to clarify that the proxy referenced in
the section is for shareholder voting, as provided in the statute. The
OCC intends no substantive change with this amendment.
President as Director; Senior Executive Officer (Sec. 7.2012)
Twelve U.S.C. 76 provides that the president of the bank must be a
member of the board and be chairman thereof, but that the board may
designate a director in lieu of the president to be chairman, who must
perform duties as assigned by the board. Section 7.2012 codifies this
statutory requirement in the OCC's rules by providing that pursuant to
12 U.S.C. 76, the president of a national bank must be a member of the
board of directors, but a director other than the president may be
elected chairman of the board. This section further provides that a
person other than the president may serve as the chief executive
officer, and that this person is not required to be a director of the
bank. When first proposing this rule, the OCC acknowledged that it was
adding this second sentence to provide that a person other than the
president or a director may serve as chief executive officer of a
bank.\119\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\119\ 60 FR 11924 (March 3, 1995). This rule was finalized in
1996. 61 FR 4849 (Feb. 9, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC is proposing two substantive changes to this section.
First, the OCC is proposing that the person serving as, or in the
function of, president of a national bank, regardless of title, must be
a member of the board of directors. This change would align the
regulation with the OCC's view that the bank officer positions in 12
U.S.C. 76 and other provisions of the National Bank Act refer to
functions rather than required titles. If a national bank does not have
an individual serving in the position of president but does have
another officer serving the function of president, the individual
serving in the function of president must be a member of the board of
directors. The person serving the function of president is generally
the individual appointed to oversee the national bank's day-to-day
activities.\120\ This change would provide national banks with
flexibility in employee titles and management organization. The OCC
notes that 12 U.S.C. 24(Fifth) provides national banks with the
authority to set the duties of their officers. National banks should
ensure that their employee titles do not create unnecessary confusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\120\ See OCC, ``The Director's Book: Role of Directors for
National Banks and Federal Savings Associations'' (July 2016),
available at www.OCC.gov (Director's Book).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the OCC is proposing to remove the provision in Sec.
7.2012 that states that a person other than the president may serve as
chief executive officer, and this person is not required to be a
director of the bank. This provision is unnecessary. The position of
chief executive officer is not referenced in statute and, as indicated
above, national banks have discretion to set the duties of their
officers. Further, this provision would conflict with the first
proposed revision. Because function rather than title would govern
under the proposal, a chief executive officer that serves the function
of president would be required to be a member of the board.\121\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\121\ The Director's Book uses the terms ``president'' and
``chief executive officer'' interchangeably to refer to the
individual appointed by the board of directors to oversee the day-
to-day activities of a national bank.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC requests comment on whether the proposed changes would
provide national banks with flexibility in their organization of
management or introduce complexity given the current practices at
national banks.
Indemnification of Institution-Affiliated Parties (Sec. Sec. 7.2014,
145.121)
The OCC is proposing to amend and reorganize Sec. 7.2014,
Indemnification of institution-affiliate parties (by national banks),
apply revised Sec. 7.2014 to Federal savings associations, and remove
Sec. 145.121, Indemnification of directors, officers and employees (by
Federal savings associations). Twelve CFR 7.2014 addresses
indemnification of institution-affiliated parties (IAPs) by national
banks in cases involving an administrative proceeding or civil action
initiated by a Federal banking agency, as well as cases that do not
involve a Federal banking agency. Under Sec. 7.2014(a), a national
bank only may make or agree to make indemnification payments to an IAP
with respect to an administrative proceeding or civil action initiated
by a Federal banking agency if those
[[Page 40813]]
payments are reasonable and consistent with the requirements of 12
U.S.C. 1828(k) and the implementing regulations thereunder. Pursuant to
section 1828(k), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) may
prohibit, by regulation or order, any indemnification payment made with
regard to an administrative proceeding or civil action instituted by
the appropriate Federal banking agency that results in a final order
under which the IAP: (1) Is assessed a civil money penalty; (2) is
removed or prohibited from participating in conduct of the affairs of
the insured depository institution; or (3) is required to take certain
affirmative actions in regards to an insured depository
institution.\122\ Section 1828(k) defines ``indemnification payment''
to mean any payment (or any agreement to make any payment) by any
insured depository institution to pay or reimburse an IAP for any
liability or legal expense with regard to any administrative proceeding
or civil action instituted by the appropriate Federal banking agency
that results in a final order under which the IAP: (1) Is assessed a
civil money penalty; (2) is removed or prohibited from participating in
conduct of the affairs of the insured depository institution; or (3) is
required to take certain affirmative actions in regards to an insured
depository institution.\123\ Section 7.2014(a) defines ``institution-
affiliated party'' by reference to 12 U.S.C. 1813(u).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\122\ In prohibiting such payments, the FDIC may take into
account several factors listed in the statute, such as whether there
is a reasonable basis to believe the IAP has committed fraud,
breached a fiduciary duty, or committed insider abuse; is
substantially responsible for the insolvency of the depository
institution; has violated any Federal or State banking law or
regulation that has had a material effect on the financial condition
of the institution; or was in a position of managerial or fiduciary
responsibility. See 12 U.S.C. 1828(k)(2). The FDIC has forbidden
certain indemnification payments by regulation. See 12 CFR
359.1(l)(1) (definition of ``prohibited indemnification payment'');
12 CFR 359.3 (forbidding prohibited indemnification payments, except
as provided in part 359).
\123\ See 12 U.S.C. 1828(k)(5)(A); see also 12 U.S.C. 1818(b)(6)
(defining affirmative actions that an IAP may be required to take in
regard to insured depository institutions for purposes of section
1828(k)(5)(A)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 7.2014(b)(1) permits a national bank to indemnify IAPs for
damages and expenses, including the advancement of legal fees and
expenses, in cases involving an administrative proceeding or civil
action that is not initiated by a Federal banking agency in accordance
with the law of the State in which the main office of the bank is
located, the law of the State in which the bank's holding company is
incorporated, or the relevant provisions of the Model Business
Corporation Act or Delaware General Corporation Law, provided such
payments are consistent with safe and sound banking practices.
Additionally, pursuant to Sec. 7.2014(b)(2), a national bank may
provide for the payment of reasonable premiums for insurance covering
the expenses, legal fees, and liability of IAPs to the extent that
these costs could be indemnified under administrative proceedings or
civil actions not initiated by a Federal banking agency, as provided in
Sec. 7.2014(b)(1).
Twelve CFR 145.121 addresses indemnification of directors, officers
and employees by Federal savings associations. Section 145.121(b)
requires a Federal savings association to indemnify any person against
whom an action is brought or threatened because that person is or was a
director, officer, or employee of the association. This indemnification
is subject to the requirements of Sec. 145.121(c) and (g). Section
145.121(c) provides that indemnification only may be made available to
the IAP if there is a final judgment on the merits in the IAP's favor;
or, in the case of settlement, final judgment against the IAP, or final
judgment in the IAP's favor other than on the merits, if a majority of
the disinterested directors of the Federal savings association
determine that the IAP was acting in good faith. It also provides that
the association give the OCC at least 60 days' notice of its intention
to indemnify an IAP and provides that the association may not indemnify
the IAP if the OCC advises the savings association in writing that the
OCC objects. Section 145.121(g) makes the indemnification subject to 12
U.S.C. 1821(k).
Pursuant to Sec. 145.121(d), a Federal savings association may
obtain insurance to protect it and its directors, officers, and
employees from potential losses arising from claims for acts committed
in their capacity as directors, officers, or employees. However, a
Federal savings association may not obtain insurance that provides for
payment of losses incurred as a consequence of willful or criminal
misconduct.
Pursuant to Sec. 145.121(e), if a majority of the directors of a
Federal savings association conclude that, in connection with an
action, a person may become entitled to indemnification, the directors
may authorize payment of reasonable costs and expenses arising from the
defense or settlement of the action. Before making advance payment of
expenses, the savings association is required to obtain an agreement
that the savings association will be repaid if the person on whose
behalf payment is made is later determined not to be entitled to the
indemnification.
Pursuant to Sec. 145.121(f), an association that has a bylaw in
effect relating to indemnification of its personnel must be governed
solely by that bylaw, except that its authority to obtain insurance
must be governed by Sec. 145.121(d), which, as described above,
authorizes the purchase of indemnification insurance unless the
insurance pays for losses created by willful or criminal misconduct.
Section 145.121(g) states that the indemnification provided for in
Sec. 145.121 for Federal savings associations is subject to and
qualified by 12 U.S.C. 1821(k), which addresses personal liability for
directors and officers in certain civil actions.
The OCC is proposing to add Federal savings associations to Sec.
7.2014 so that both charters would be required to comply with Sec.
7.2014. Because Sec. 7.2014 applies to IAPs and not only officers,
directors, and employees as does Sec. 145.121, the scope of
indemnification rules for Federal savings associations would be
broader, applying also to certain Federal savings association
controlling shareholders, independent contractors, consultants, and
other persons identified in 12 U.S.C. 1813(u).
The OCC also is proposing changes to Sec. 7.2014. First, the
proposal would amend current Sec. 7.2014(b)(1), redesignated in this
proposal as Sec. 7.2014(a) and retitled, to provide that State law on
indemnification may apply to all administrative proceedings or civil
actions for which an IAP can be indemnified, not just actions that are
initiated by a person or entity not a Federal banking agency as under
the current rule. This would clarify the application of State law on
indemnification to actions initiated by Federal banking agencies.
However, current Sec. 7.2014(a), redesignated by this proposal as
Sec. 7.2014(b), would still apply. Specifically, under redesignated
Sec. 7.2014(b), with respect to proceedings or civil actions initiated
by a Federal banking agency, a national bank or Federal savings
association only may make or agree to make indemnification payments to
an IAP that are reasonable and consistent with the requirements of
section 1828(k) and implementing regulations thereunder.\124\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\124\ The OCC also proposes to move the cross-reference to the
definition of IAP in redesignated Sec. 7.2014(b) to redesignated
paragraph (a) and to make stylistic changes to the wording of
redesignated Sec. 7.2014(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC also is proposing a technical change to redesignated Sec.
7.2014(a). As
[[Page 40814]]
indicated above, the current rule states that in cases involving an
administrative proceeding or civil action not initiated by a Federal
banking agency, a national bank may indemnify an IAP in accordance with
the law of the State in which the main office of the bank is located,
the law of the State in which the bank's holding company is
incorporated, or the relevant provisions of the Model Business
Corporation Act or Delaware General Corporation Law, provided such
payments are consistent with safe and sound banking practices. Because
these sources of law are identical to the law a national bank may elect
to follow pursuant to Sec. 7.2000(b) or the law a Federal savings
association may elect to follow pursuant to Sec. Sec. 5.21 or 5.22,
the OCC proposes to replace the language on sources of State law in
this provision with a statement that the bank or savings association
may indemnify an IAP for damages and expenses in accordance with the
law of the State the bank or savings association has designated for its
corporate governance under the provisions of Sec. Sec. 7.2000, 5.21,
or 5.22, as applicable.\125\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\125\ As explained supra, the OCC is proposing to amend Sec.
7.2000 to also allow national banks to follow the corporate
governance provisions of the law of any State in which any branch of
the bank is located or where a holding company of the bank is
incorporated even if the holding company is later eliminated or no
longer controls the bank and the national bank is not located in
that State. The OCC is requesting comment on making the same change
to Sec. Sec. 5.21 and 5.22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.2014(b)(2),
redesignated as Sec. 7.2014(d) in the proposal, to allow a national
bank or Federal savings association to provide for the payment of
reasonable insurance premiums in connection with all actions involving
an IAP that could be indemnified under Sec. 7.2014, whether or not
initiated by a Federal banking agency. The OCC believes this change
would resolve confusion regarding how current Sec. 7.2014(b)(2) is
applied. This proposed change also would better align OCC regulations
on the payment of insurance premiums with the FDIC's regulations and 12
U.S.C. 1828(k).\126\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\126\ The FDIC's implementing regulations under section 1828(k),
12 CFR part 359, explicitly allow the payment of insurance premiums
in anticipation of actions brought by a Federal banking agency,
provided the insurance is not used to reimburse the cost of a
judgment or civil monetary penalty. See 12 CFR 359.1(l)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, the OCC is proposing to add a new paragraph (c) that would
require a national bank or Federal savings association, before
advancing funds to an IAP under Sec. 7.2014, to obtain a written
agreement that the IAP will reimburse the bank for any portion of
indemnification that the IAP is ultimately found not to be entitled to
under 12 U.S.C. 1828(k) and implementing regulations, except to the
extent the bank's expenses have been reimbursed by an insurance policy
or fidelity bond.\127\ This requirement is similar to the requirement
in Sec. 145.121(e) currently applicable to Federal savings
associations and therefore would not impose any additional burdens on
Federal savings associations. Further, FDIC regulations,\128\ State
law,\129\ and the Model Business Corporation Act \130\ contain similar
requirements for IAPs to reimburse institutions for funds to which they
are later found not to be entitled. As most national banks are subject
to the FDIC's indemnification regulations or have elected under 12 CFR
7.2000(b) to follow State corporate law imposing reimbursement
requirements for advancement of funds, the OCC believes that this
proposed change would not impose any additional burden on national
banks and would merely codify existing practices. This proposed change
also will ensure that national banks, and Federal savings associations,
do not provide indemnification to IAPs that is ultimately in
contravention of the statutory limits of section 1828(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\127\ National banks are required to purchase fidelity coverage
by 12 CFR 7.2013.
\128\ See 12 CFR 359.5(a)(4).
\129\ See, e.g., 8 Del. C. Sec. 145(e); Utah Code Sec. 16-10a-
904; 805 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/8.75(e); see also N.Y. Bus. Corp. Law
Sec. 725(a) (requiring repayment, but not explicitly requiring a
written agreement).
\130\ See Model Bus. Corp. Act Sec. 8.53(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC believes that proposed Sec. 7.2014 incorporates the
provisions of current Sec. 145.121 that should be applicable to both
national banks and Federal savings associations, while maintaining
appropriate flexibility for both types of institutions. Specifically,
the proposal would apply Sec. 7.2014 to actions brought by a Federal
banking agency and actions not brought by a Federal banking agency, as
in Sec. 145.121, while retaining the statutory limits of section
1828(k).\131\ The proposal also includes the reimbursement agreement
requirement, as in Sec. 145.121(e). However, the proposed rule does
not include the provision in Sec. 145.121 that requires Federal
savings associations to indemnify persons against whom an action is
brought under certain circumstances, such as if they are successful on
the merits of the action, nor \132\ the provision requiring a board
vote to authorize indemnification under certain circumstances.\133\ In
place of these requirements, proposed Sec. 7.2014 would permit Federal
savings associations to incorporate State law on indemnification.
Because State law governing indemnification generally incorporates
these aspects of current Sec. 145.121, the OCC expects that Federal
savings associations will continue to be subject to similar provisions
governing indemnification as before. For example, State law generally
requires mandatory indemnification if an employee is successful on the
merits,\134\ as well as a board vote authorizing indemnification in
almost all circumstances.\135\ Because national banks also may
incorporate State indemnification law, they would be subject to these
State indemnification provisions as well. The OCC specifically requests
comment on whether, instead of relying on State law, the final rule
should include the requirement from Sec. 145.121 that, in the case of
settlement, final judgment against the IAP, or final judgment in the
IAP's favor other than on the merits, a majority of the disinterested
directors determine that the IAP was acting in good faith before the
instruction may indemnify the IAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\131\ Section 145.121(g) subjects and qualifies the
indemnification provided for by current Sec. 145.121 to 12 U.S.C.
1821(k). In contrast, current Sec. 7.2014 explicitly subjects
national bank indemnification to the restrictions of 12 U.S.C.
1828(k). Section 1828(k) directly addresses indemnification and is
applicable to any insured depository institution. See 12 U.S.C.
1828(k)(5)(A). Section 1821(k) addresses personal liability for
directors and officers and is also applicable to any insured
depository institution. Both of these statutes apply, and will
continue to apply to national banks and Federal savings associations
but proposed Sec. 7.2014 retains the citation to section 1828(k) as
the more relevant citation for indemnification purposes.
\132\ See Sec. 145.121(b).
\133\ See Sec. 145.121(c)(1)(ii)(C)).
\134\ See, e.g., 8 Del. C. 145(c); New York BCL Sec. 723(a);
805 ILCS 5/8.75(c); Model Bus. Corp. Act, Sec. 8.52 (2016).
\135\ See, e.g., 8 Del. C. 145(d); New York BCL Sec. 723(b);
805 ILCS 5/8.75(d); Model Bus. Corp. Act, Sec. Sec. 8.53(c), 8.55
(2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule also does not include the provision in Sec.
145.121 that requires a 60-day prior notice to the OCC before making an
indemnification.\136\ The OCC is not proposing to retain this provision
because it believes it is burdensome and unnecessary. However, the OCC
requests comment on whether the final rule should include this prior
notice requirement and, if so, what benefits prior approval would
provide that would outweigh any additional regulatory burden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\136\ See Sec. 145.121(c)(2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40815]]
Restricting Transfer of Stock and Record Dates; Stock Certificates
(Sec. 7.2016)
Facsimile Signatures on Bank Stock Certificates (Sec. 7.2017)
Lost Stock Certificates (Sec. 7.2018)
Sections 12 CFR 7.2016, 7.2017, and 7.2018 contain specific
requirements related to national bank stock transfers and stock
certificates. Many of these requirements are mandated by 12 U.S.C. 52.
However, some of these requirements are outdated because national banks
today rarely issue physical stock certificates.
Section 7.2016(a) states that, pursuant section 52, a national bank
may impose conditions on the transfer of its stock reasonably
calculated to simplify the work of the bank with respect to stock
transfers, voting at shareholders' meetings, and related matters and to
protect the bank against fraudulent transfers. Consistent with the
statute, Sec. 7.2016(b) allows a national bank to close its stock
records for a reasonable period to ascertain shareholders for voting
purposes. The board also may fix record dates, which should be
reasonable in proximity to the date notice is given to shareholders of
the meeting. Section 7.2017 states that the president and cashier of
the bank, or other officers authorized by the bank's bylaws, shall sign
each stock certificate. These signatures may be manual or facsimile and
may be electronic. Each certificate also must be sealed with the seal
of the bank.
To streamline OCC rules, the OCC is proposing to combine Sec. Sec.
7.2016 and 7.2017 into one section, Sec. 7.2016, that would apply to
both stock transfers and stock certificate requirements. The OCC also
is proposing to make OCC rules on stock certificates more flexible. As
noted above, section 12 U.S.C. 52 requires certain officers of the
association to sign every bank stock certificate and for it to be
sealed with the seal of the association. However, banks now generally
hold stock in ``book-entry'' form, which is not a format that supports
signatures or stamps. Although section 52 places requirements on
physical stock certificates, the OCC does not believe that the language
of that section requires banks to actually issue stock in certificated
form.
Notably, section 52 also states that ``[t]he capital stock of each
association shall be . . . transferable on the books of the association
in such manner as may be prescribed in the by-laws or articles of
association.'' \137\ This language allows banks to provide for book-
entry transfer in their by-laws or articles of association, even if
this type of transfer is incompatible with the use of signatures and
seals. Therefore, the OCC is proposing to state that a national bank
may prescribe the manner in which its stock shall be transferred in its
by-laws or articles of association. The OCC also is proposing to
specify that a national bank that does issue stock in certificate form
must comply with the requirements of section 52, including: (1) The
name and location of the bank; (2) name and holder of record of the
stock; (3) the number and class of shares which the certificate
represents; (4) if the bank issues more than one class of stock, the
respective rights, preferences, privileges, voting rights, powers,
restrictions, limitations, and qualifications of each class of stock
issued (unless incorporated by reference to the articles of
association); (5) signatures of the president and cashier of the bank,
or such other officers as the bylaws of the bank provide; and (6) the
seal of the bank. The OCC is proposing to continue allowing banks to
meet the signature requirements of section 52 through the use of
electronic means or by facsimiles, as is permitted by current Sec.
7.2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\137\ See 12 U.S.C. 52, first paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the OCC is proposing to remove Sec. 7.2018 as
unnecessary. Section 7.2018 states that if the bank's articles of
association or bylaws do not provide for replacing lost, stolen, or
destroyed stock certificates, the bank may adopt procedures under 12
CFR 7.2000. Section 7.2000 generally permits national banks to adopt
corporate governance procedures \138\ in accordance with State law, to
the extent not inconsistent with applicable Federal laws and
regulations or with bank safety and soundness. Therefore, this
provision is unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\138\ The proposed rule would change this terminology in Sec.
7.2000 to ``corporate governance provisions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acquisition and Holding of Shares as Treasury Stock (Sec. 7.2020)
The OCC is proposing to remove 12 CFR 7.2020. Currently, Sec.
7.2020 provides that a national bank may repurchase its outstanding
shares and hold them as treasury stock as a capital reduction under 12
U.S.C. 59 if the repurchase and retention is for a ``legitimate
corporate purpose'' and not for speculative purposes. The OCC issued
Sec. 7.2020 in 1996 as an exception to the provision in 12 U.S.C. 83
that prohibited a national bank from being the ``purchaser or holder''
of its own shares. However, in 2000, Congress amended section 83 to
remove this prohibition.\139\ Therefore, Sec. 7.2020 is unnecessary.
The OCC notes that removing Sec. 7.2020 would not limit the OCC's
authority over share repurchases. Share repurchases are considered
reductions in capital and would continue to be subject to OCC and
shareholder approval under 12 U.S.C. 59 and 12 CFR 5.46.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\139\ Public Law 106-569, Title XII, section 1207(a), 114 Stat.
3034 (American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capital Stock-Related Activities of a National Bank (New Sec. 7.2025)
The OCC is proposing a new section, Sec. 7.2025, that would codify
various OCC interpretations of the National Bank Act involving capital
stock issuances and repurchases. Specifically, proposed Sec. 7.2025
would explain the shareholder approval requirements for the issuance of
authorized common stock; the issuance, repurchase, and redemption of
preferred stock pursuant to blank check procedures; and share
repurchase programs. Generally, an increase or decrease in the amount
of a national bank's common or preferred stock is a change in permanent
capital subject to the notice and approval requirements of 12 CFR 5.46
and applicable law.\140\ Proposed Sec. 7.2025(a) sets forth the
general requirements for changes in permanent capital. Paragraphs (b)
through (d) of proposed Sec. 7.2025 provide more specific requirements
for shareholder approval of various types of issuances and repurchases.
Section 7.2025(e) would identify certain permissible features for
preferred stock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\140\ See generally 12 U.S.C. 51a, (preferred stock issuance),
57 (increase in capital), and 59 (reduction of capital).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issuance of previously approved and authorized common stock. The
issuance of common stock is governed by 12 U.S.C. 57, which provides
that a national bank ``may, with the approval of the [OCC], and by a
vote of shareholders owning two-thirds of the stock of such [bank],
increase its capital stock to any sum.'' The OCC has interpreted 12
U.S.C. 57 to require a two-thirds shareholder vote to amend the
articles of association to increase the number of authorized
shares.\141\ The OCC also has long interpreted section 57 to permit a
national bank's board of directors to issue common stock without
obtaining additional shareholder approval at the time of the issuance
so long as the issuance does not exceed the amount of common stock
previously
[[Page 40816]]
approved and authorized by shareholders.\142\ Proposed 7.2025(b) would
codify this interpretation. Specifically, paragraph (b) would provide
that, in compliance with 12 U.S.C. 57, a national bank may issue common
stock up to an amount previously approved and authorized in the
national bank's articles of association by holders of two-thirds of the
national bank's shares without obtaining additional shareholder
approval for each subsequent issuance within the authorized amount.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\141\ See, e.g., Articles of Association, Charter, and Bylaw
Amendments, Comptroller's Licensing Manual (June 2017), p. 3
(indicating that two-thirds of a national bank's shareholders must
vote to increase or decrease the authorized number of common shares
in the articles of association).
\142\ A previous version of Sec. 5.46 (1981) provided that
shareholder approval would not be required to increase common stock
through the issuance of a class of common up to an amount previously
approved by shareholders. Subsequent amendments to Sec. 5.46, which
the OCC intended to simplify 12 CFR part 5, omitted this language
but did not change this interpretation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issuance, repurchase, and redemption of preferred stock pursuant to
certain procedures. Twelve U.S.C. 51a requires a majority of
shareholders vote to approve a national bank's issuance of preferred
stock. However, the statute does not specify when in the process the
bank must obtain shareholder approval. In OCC Interpretive Letter 921,
the OCC determined that a national bank could adopt, subject to
required shareholder approval, a provision in its articles of
association or an amendment to its articles authorizing the bank's
board of directors to issue preferred stock using blank check
procedures (``blank check preferred stock'').\143\ Blank check
preferred stock refers to preferred stock for which the board is
empowered to issue and determine the terms of authorized and unissued
preferred stock. To be permissible, blank check preferred stock must be
permitted by the corporate governance procedures adopted by the bank
under Sec. 7.2000.\144\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\143\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 921 (Dec. 13, 2001).
\144\ The proposed rule would change this terminology in Sec.
7.2000 to ``corporate governance provisions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC also determined that shareholders' adoption or approval of
a blank check preferred stock article constitutes the shareholder
action required by 12 U.S.C. 51a and 51b to issue and establish the
terms of preferred stock. The subsequent issuance of the preferred
stock within the authorized limits would not require additional
shareholder approval. Interpretive Letter 921 did not specifically
address blank check preferred procedures that include the authority,
and the shareholder action required, to repurchase and redeem blank
check preferred stock.
The redemption or repurchase of preferred stock is a reduction in
capital. Twelve U.S.C. 59 requires the approval of two-thirds of
shareholders for a national bank to reduce capital, but it does not
specify when in the process the bank must obtain shareholder approval.
In Interpretive Letter 1162, the OCC determined that the holders of
two-thirds of a national bank's shares may approve in advance
redemptions of blank check preferred stock by voting to amend the
articles of association to authorize the issuance and redemption of
blank check preferred shares.\145\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\145\ OCC Interpretive Letter No. 1162 (July 6, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Sec. 7.2025(c) would codify these interpretations and
permit blank check procedures, if approved in advance by the bank's
shareholders, that authorize the issuance, repurchase, and redemption
of preferred stock without additional shareholder approval at the time
of issuance, repurchase, or redemption, if certain conditions are met.
Proposed paragraph (c) would provide that, subject to the requirements
of 12 U.S.C. 51a, 51b, and 59, a national bank may adopt procedures to
authorize the board of directors to issue, determine the terms of,
repurchase, or redeem one or more series of preferred stock, if
permitted by the corporate governance provisions adopted by the bank
under 12 CFR 7.2000. This proposed provision further provides that, to
satisfy the shareholder approval requirements of 12 U.S.C. 51a and 59,
shareholders must approve the adoption of these procedures in advance
through an amendment to the national bank's articles of association,
and that any amendment that authorizes both the issuance and the
repurchase and redemption of shares must be approved by holders of two-
thirds of the national bank's shares.
Share repurchase programs. In Interpretive Letter 1162, the OCC
determined that the shareholder approval requirement in 12 U.S.C. 59
may be satisfied by a two-thirds shareholder vote approving an
amendment to the bank's articles of association authorizing the board
of directors to implement share repurchase programs. A share repurchase
program authorizes the board of directors to repurchase the national
bank's common or preferred stock from time to time under board-
determined parameters that can limit the frequency, type, aggregate
limit, or purchase price of repurchases, without obtaining additional
shareholder approval at the time the shares are repurchased. Proposed
Sec. 7.2025(d) would codify this interpretation by providing that,
subject to the requirements of 12 U.S.C. 59, a national bank may
establish a program for the repurchase, from time to time, of the
national bank's common or preferred stock, if permitted by the
corporate governance provisions adopted by the bank under 12 CFR
7.2000. Proposed paragraph (d) also provides that, to satisfy the
shareholder approval requirement of 12 U.S.C. 59, the repurchase
program must be approved in advance by the holders of two-thirds of the
national bank's shares, including through an amendment to the national
bank's articles of association that authorizes the board of directors
to implement share repurchase programs from time to time under board-
determined parameters that can limit the frequency, type, aggregate
limit, or purchase price of repurchases.
Preferred stock features. Proposed Sec. 7.2025(e) would clarify
that a national bank may issue and maintain noncumulative preferred
stock under 12 U.S.C. 51b. This provision would codify a longstanding
OCC interpretation that section 51b, by its terms, describes
limitations on the portion of the preferred stock dividend which may be
cumulative. It does not require that preferred stock dividends must
always be cumulative.\146\ Specifically, proposed Sec. 7.2025(e) would
provide that a national bank's preferred stock may be cumulative or
non-cumulative and may or may not have voting rights on one or more
series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\146\ In part, section 51b provides that preferred shareholders
``shall be entitled to receive such cumulative dividends . . . as
may be provided in the articles of association . . . and no
dividends shall be declared or paid on common stock until cumulative
dividends on preferred stock have been paid in full. . . . '' The
OCC has previously interpreted section 51a as providing national
banks with broad authority to issue preferred stock, including
preferred stock bearing noncumulative dividends, notwithstanding the
language of section 51b. See OCC Letter from Martin Goodman, OCC
Assoc. Ch. Couns. (Oct. 3, 1977).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart C-- National Bank and Federal Savings Association Operations
National Bank and Federal Savings Association Hours and Closings (Sec.
7.3000)
The OCC is proposing to amend Sec. 7.3000, National bank hours and
closings, to include Federal savings associations, to update it, and to
make technical and clarifying changes.
Twelve U.S.C. 95(b)(1) specifically authorizes the Comptroller to
designate a legal holiday because of emergency conditions occurring in
any State or part of a State for national banks located in that State
or affected area. Section 95(b)(1) also provides that when a State or
State official authorized by law designates any day as a legal holiday
for
[[Page 40817]]
ceremonial or emergency reasons, that day is a legal holiday and a
national bank located in that State or affected part of the State may
close or remain open unless the Comptroller directs otherwise by
written order.
The OCC has implemented this statutory provision in 12 CFR 7.3000.
Specifically, Sec. 7.3000(b) provides that when the Comptroller, a
State, or a legally authorized State official declares a day a legal
holiday due to emergency conditions, a national bank may temporarily
limit or suspend its operations at its affected offices. Alternatively,
the bank may continue its operations, unless the Comptroller directs
otherwise by written order. This rule provides that emergency
conditions include natural disasters and civil and municipal
emergencies, such as severe flooding or a power emergency declared by a
local power company or government requesting that businesses in the
affected area close. Section 7.3000(c) states that a State or a legally
authorized State official may declare a day a legal holiday for
ceremonial reasons and provides that when a State legal holiday is
declared for ceremonial reasons, a national bank may choose to remain
open or to close. Section 7.3000(d) provides that a national bank
should assure that all liabilities or other obligations under the
applicable law due to the bank's closing are satisfied, e.g., notice to
depositors about funds availability pursuant to 12 CFR 229.13(g)(4).
There is no equivalent statute or corresponding regulation for
Federal savings associations. However, a former OTS regulation at 12
CFR 510.2(b) permitted the OTS to waive or relax any limitations
pertaining to the operations of a Federal savings associations in any
area affected by a determination by the President of the United States
that a major disaster or emergency had occurred. Amending Sec. 7.300
to include Federal savings associations would clarify for these
institutions how a legal holiday is declared and the implications of a
legal holiday declaration, as well as provide consistency between
national bank and Federal savings association operations on legal
holidays. We note that the Comptroller is directed under section 4 of
the HOLA (12 U.S.C. 1463(a)(1)(A)) to provide for the ``safe and sound
operation'' of Federal savings associations.\147\ The OTS relied on
this HOLA authority when it issued Sec. 510.2(b) \148\ and this
proposed rule furthers that objective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\147\ See also 12 U.S.C. 1(a) (charging the OCC with assuring
the safety and soundness of institutions subject to its
jurisdiction).
\148\ See 54 FR 49411, at 49456 (Nov. 30, 1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCC also is proposing a number of changes to clarify and update
the emergency closing provisions of Sec. 7.3000. First, the OCC is
proposing to clarify that Sec. 7.3000 also applies to Federal branches
and agencies of foreign banks. Although current Sec. 7.3000 applies to
Federal branches and agencies pursuant to section 4(b) of the
International Banking Act, 12 U.S.C. 3102(b), the OCC believes it is
appropriate to specify this application in the rule.\149\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\149\ As indicated previously in this preamble, section 4(b) of
the International Banking Act, 12 U.S.C. 3102(b), provides that the
operations of a foreign bank at a Federal branch or agency shall be
conducted with the same rights and privileges as a national bank at
the same location and shall be subject to all the same duties,
restrictions, penalties, liabilities, conditions, and limitations
that would apply under the National Bank Act to a national bank
doing business at the same location. See also 12 CFR 28.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the proposal would provide that the Comptroller may declare
``any day'' a legal holiday, instead of ``a day,'' to more accurately
reflect the statutory language and to clarify that the Comptroller may
declare more than one day due to the emergency condition as a legal
holiday.
Third, the proposed rule would amend Sec. 7.3000(b) to state that
emergency conditions could be ``caused by acts of nature or of man.''
This amendment mirrors the language in 12 U.S.C. 95(b)(1) and would
clarify the broad scope of possible emergency conditions that could
justify a legal holiday.
Fourth, the proposal updates the types of emergency conditions
listed in the rule to include disasters other than natural disasters,
public health or safety emergencies, and cyber threats or other
unauthorized intrusions, and updates the list of examples to include
pandemics, terrorist attacks, and cyber-attacks on bank systems.
Fifth, the proposal provides that the Comptroller may issue a
declaration of a legal holiday in anticipation of the emergency
condition, in addition to at the time of the emergency or soon
thereafter. This codifies the current practice of the Comptroller in
most cases, which permits national banks, Federal savings associations,
and Federal branches and agencies to better plan for the possible
closing.
Sixth, the proposal provides that in the absence of a Comptroller
declaration of a bank holiday, a national bank, Federal savings
associations, or Federal branch or agency may choose to temporarily
close offices in response to an emergency condition. The bank, savings
associations, or branch or agency would need to notify the OCC of such
temporary closure as soon as feasible. This provision would provide
additional flexibility to OCC-regulated institutions during emergency
conditions and would codify similar language currently included in the
OCC's Licensing Manual.\150\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\150\ See Comptroller's Licensing Manual, Branch Closings (June
2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seventh, the proposal clarifies in Sec. 7.3000(c) that a State
legal holiday may be for the entire State or part of the State, as
indicated in 12 U.S.C. 95(b)(1).
Eighth, as provided in the statute, the proposal provides in Sec.
7.3000(c) that the Comptroller may by written order direct the affected
institution to close or remain open during a State legal holiday
declared for ceremonial reasons, as with a State legal holiday declared
due to an emergency.
Finally, the proposed rule adds a new paragraph, Sec. 7.3000(e),
to provide a definition of ``State'' that is consistent with the
definition in 12 U.S.C. 95(b)(2).
In addition, the OCC is proposing a number of technical changes to
Sec. 7.3000. The proposal would replace the word ``country'' with
``United States'' in the phrase describing affected geographic area to
make this phrase more precise; delete the superfluous citation to 12
U.S.C. 95 in Sec. 7.3000(b); and delete the superfluous first sentence
of current Sec. 7.3000(c), which states that a State or a legally
authorized State official may declare a day a legal holiday for
ceremonial reasons.
In proposing these changes, the OCC is reorganizing Sec. 7.3000(b)
and (c) so that all provisions relating to Comptroller declared legal
holidays for emergency conditions are in Sec. 7.3000(b) and all
provisions related to State declared legal holidays for emergency and
ceremonial reasons are in Sec. 7.3000(c). This reorganization more
clearly sets forth the standards for Comptroller and State declared
legal holidays and corresponds better with the statutory text.
Section 7.3000 also provides, in paragraph (a), that a national
bank's board of directors should review its banking hours and,
independently of any other bank, take appropriate actions to
establishing a schedule of its banking hours. The OCC is proposing to
update this provision by replacing ``banking hours'' with ``hours of
operations for customers.'' Furthermore, the OCC is proposing to
include Federal savings associations and Federal branches and agencies
in this provision. Because Federal branches and agencies typically
[[Page 40818]]
do not have a board of directors, proposed Sec. 7.3000(a) would
provide that an equivalent person or committee for a Federal branch or
agency should review that entity's operating hours and take appropriate
action to establish a schedule of operating hours for customers.
Sharing National Bank or Federal Savings Association Space and
Employees (Sec. 7.3001)
Section 7.3001 permits national banks and Federal savings
associations to lease excess space on bank or savings association
premises to other businesses, share space jointly held with other
businesses, offer its services in space owned by or leased to other
businesses, and share employees when sharing space. The OCC proposes to
add a cross-reference to redesignated Sec. 7.1024, National bank or
Federal savings association ownership of property, in Sec.
7.3001(a)(1) to clarify that the requirements of Sec. 7.1024 apply to
the sharing of office space and employees pursuant to Sec. 7.3001.
General Technical Changes
In addition to the technical changes discussed above, the OCC
proposes numerous technical changes throughout 12 CFR part 7.
Specifically, the proposed rule would:
Replace the word ``shall'' with ``must,'' ``will,'' or
other appropriate language, which is the more current rule writing
convention for imposing an obligation and is the recommended drafting
style of the Federal Register;
Uniformly capitalize the words ``State'' and ``Federal''
in conformance with Federal Register drafting style;
Replace the term ``bank'' and ``savings association'' with
``national bank'' or ``Federal savings association,'' respectively,
where appropriate;
Clarify punctuation and update or conform spelling of
various terms; and
Conform paragraph heading style.
III. Request for Comments
The OCC requests comment on any aspect of this proposal, in
addition to those specific requests noted in the SUPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. Further, the COVID 19 emergency has required banks in many
cases to consider changes to the way they do business and may
potentially result in longer term changes in industry practices. The
OCC requests comment on whether it should consider other amendments to
part 7 to address issues that may have arisen due to the COVID-19
pandemic. If so, please provide suggestions for specific amendments and
not general requests for changes.\151\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\151\ As indicated previously in this Supplementary Information
section, the OCC has issued an interim final rule that amends 12 CFR
7.1001 and 7.1003 to provide for remote participation at shareholder
and board of director meetings to allow national banks to hold these
meetings without violating social distancing restrictions imposed in
response to the COVID-19 emergency. See 85 FR 31943 (May 28, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Regulatory Analyses
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
Certain provisions of the proposed rulemaking contain ``collection
of information'' requirements within the meaning of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). In accordance with
the requirements of the PRA, the OCC may not conduct or sponsor, and a
respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection
unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) control number.
The OCC reviewed the proposed rulemaking and determined that it
revises certain information collection requirements previously cleared
by OMB under OMB Control No. 1557-0204. The OCC has submitted the
revised information collection to OMB for review under section 3507(d)
of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) and section 1320.11 of the OMB's
implementing regulations (5 CFR 1320).
Current Actions
The information collection requirements are as follows:
Tax Equity Finance Transactions--Written requests are
required to increase the aggregate limit on tax equity finance
transactions. Prior written notification to OCC is required for each
tax equity finance transaction. Sec. 7.1025.
Payment Systems--Thirty (30) days advance written notice
is required before joining a payment system that would expose the
institution to open-end liability. An after-the-fact written notice
must be filed within 30 days of becoming a member of a payment system
that does not expose the institution to open-end liabilities with
certain representations. Both notices must include safety and soundness
representations. Sec. 7.1026.
Derivatives Activities--Thirty (30) days prior written
notice is required before engaging in certain derivatives hedging
activities, expanding derivatives hedging activities to include a new
category of underlying, engaging in certain customer-driven financial
intermediation derivatives activities, and expanding customer-driven
financial intermediation derivatives activities to include a new
category of underlying. Sec. 7.1030.
State Corporate Governance--Requests for OCC's staff
position on the ability of national bank to engage in particular State
corporate governance provision must include name, citations, discussion
of similarly suited State banks, identification of Federal banking
statutes and regulations, and analysis of consistency with statutes,
regulations, and safety and soundness. Sec. 7.2000.
Indemnification of institution-affiliated parties--
Administrative proceeding or civil actions not initiated by a Federal
banking agency--A written agreement that an IAP will reimburse the
institution for any portion of non-reimbursed indemnification that the
IAP is found not entitled to is required before advancing funds to an
IAP. Federal savings associations no longer required to provide OCC
prior notice of indemnification. Sec. 7.2014.
Issuing Stock in Certificate Form--National banks must
include certain information, signatures and seal when issuing stock in
certificate form. Sec. 7.2016.
Title of Information Collection: Bank Activities and Operations.
Frequency: Event generated.
Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit.
Estimated number of respondents: 213.
Total estimated annual burden: 586 hours.
Comments are invited on:
a. Whether the collections of information are necessary for the
proper performance of the agencies' functions, including whether the
information has practical utility;
b. The accuracy or the estimate of the burden of the information
collections, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used;
c. Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected;
d. Ways to minimize the burden of the information collections on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology; and
e. Estimates of capital or startup costs and costs of operation,
maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.
All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments on
aspects of this notice that may affect reporting, recordkeeping, or
disclosure requirements and burden estimates should be sent to the
addresses listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. Written
comments and
[[Page 40819]]
recommendations for the information collection should be sent within 60
days of publication of this notice of proposed rulemaking to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
In general, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) requires an agency, in connection with a proposed rule, to
prepare an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis describing the
impact of the rule on small entities (defined by the Small Business
Administration for purposes of the RFA to include commercial banks and
savings institutions with total assets of $600 million or less and
trust companies with total assets of $41.5 million of less). However,
under section 605(b) of the RFA, this analysis is not required if an
agency certifies that the rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities and publishes its
certification and a short explanatory statement in the Federal Register
along with its rule.
The OCC currently supervises approximately 1,185 institutions
(commercial banks, trust companies, Federal savings associations, and
branches or agencies of foreign banks, collectively banks), of which
782 are small entities.\152\ Because the rule applies to all OCC-
supervised depository institutions, the proposed rule would affect all
small OCC-supervised entities and thus, a substantial number of them.
However, almost all of the provisions in the final rule clarify or
codify existing requirements, loosen existing requirements, increase
flexibility, or reduce burden. One provision in the proposed rule,
Sec. 7.2012, which would require a bank president to be a member of
the bank's board of directors, could impose a new requirement on banks
subject to the prior notice requirement for any change in directors
pursuant to 12 CFR 5.51. However, the number of banks that are subject
to this prior notice requirement that do not currently have a president
serving on the board of directors is limited. As a result, the proposed
rule, if implemented, would not impose new mandates on more than a
limited number of banks. Therefore, the OCC believes the costs
associated with the proposed rule, if any, would be minimal and thus
the proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any
small OCC-supervised entities. For these reasons, the OCC certifies
that, if adopted, the proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities supervised by
the OCC. Accordingly, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not
required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\152\ Consistent with the General Principles of Affiliation 13
CFR 121.103(a), the OCC counts the assets of affiliated financial
institutions when determining if it should classify an institution
as a small entity. The OCC used December 31, 2018, to determine size
because a ``financial institution's assets are determined by
averaging the assets reported on its four quarterly financial
statements for the preceding year.'' See footnote 8 of the U.S.
Small Business Administration's Table of Size Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The OCC has analyzed the proposed rule under the factors in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.
Under this analysis the OCC considered whether the proposed 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 ($154 million as
adjusted annually for inflation). The UMRA does not apply to
regulations that incorporate requirements specifically set forth in
law.
As discussed above, the proposed rule, if implemented, would not
impose new mandates on more than a limited number of banks. Therefore,
the OCC concludes that if implemented, the proposed rule would not
result in an expenditure of $154 million or more annually by State,
local, and tribal governments, or by the private sector. Therefore, the
OCC finds that the proposed rule does not trigger the UMRA cost
threshold. Accordingly, the OCC has not prepared the written statement
described in section 202 of the UMRA.
E. Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994
Pursuant to section 302(a) of the Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 (RCDRIA), 12 U.S.C. 4802(a), in
determining the effective date and administrative compliance
requirements for new regulations that impose additional reporting,
disclosure, or other requirements on insured depository institutions,
the OCC will consider, consistent with principles of safety and
soundness and the public interest: (1) Any administrative burdens that
the proposed rule would place on depository institutions, including
small depository institutions and customers of depository institutions;
and (2) the benefits of the proposed rule. The OCC requests comment on
any administrative burdens that the proposed rule would place on
depository institutions, including small depository institutions, and
their customers, and the benefits of the proposed rule that the OCC
should consider in determining the effective date and administrative
compliance requirements for a final rule.
List of Subjects
12 CFR Part 7
Computer technology, Credit, Derivatives, Federal savings
associations, Insurance, Investments, Metals, National banks, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Securities, Security bonds
12 CFR Part 145
Electronic funds transfers, Public deposits, Federal savings
associations
12 CFR Part 160
Consumer protection, Investments, Manufactured homes, Mortgages,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations,
Securities.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the OCC proposes to amend
12 CFR chapter I as follows:
PART 7--ACTIVITIES AND OPERATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 7 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1 et seq., 25b, 29, 71, 71a, 92, 92a, 93,
93a, 95(b)(1), 371, 371d, 481, 484, 1463, 1464, 1465, 1818, 1828(m),
3102(b), and 5412(b)(2)(B).
Sec. 7.1000 [Redesignated]
0
2. Redesignate Sec. 7.1000 as Sec. 7.1024.
0
3. Add Sec. 7.1000 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1000 Activities that are part of, or incidental to, the
business of banking.
(a) Purpose. This section identifies the criteria that the Office
of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) uses to determine whether an
activity is authorized as part of, or incidental to, the business of
banking under 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) or other statutory authority.
(b) Restrictions and conditions on activities. The OCC may
determine that activities are permissible under 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh)
or other statutory authority only if they are subject to standards or
conditions designed to provide that the activities function as intended
and are conducted safely and soundly, in accordance with other
applicable statutes, regulations, or supervisory policies.
[[Page 40820]]
(c) Activities that are part of the business of banking.
(1) An activity is permissible for national banks as part of the
business of banking if the activity is authorized under 12 U.S.C.
24(Seventh) or other statutory authority. In determining whether an
activity that is not specifically included in 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) or
other statutory authority is part of the business of banking, the OCC
considers the following factors:
(i) Whether the activity is the functional equivalent to, or a
logical outgrowth of, a recognized banking activity;
(ii) Whether the activity strengthens the bank by benefiting its
customers or its business;
(iii) Whether the activity involves risks similar in nature to
those already assumed by banks; and
(iv) Whether the activity is authorized for State-chartered banks.
(2) The weight accorded each factor set out in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.
(d) Activities that are incidental to the business of banking.
(1) An activity is authorized for a national bank as incidental to
the business of banking if it is convenient or useful to an activity
that is specifically authorized for national banks or to an activity
that is otherwise part of the business of banking. In determining
whether an activity is convenient or useful to such activities, the OCC
considers the following factors:
(i) Whether the activity facilitates the production or delivery of
a bank's products or services, enhances the bank's ability to sell or
market its products or services, or improves the effectiveness or
efficiency of the bank's operations, in light of risks presented,
innovations, strategies, techniques and new technologies for producing
and delivering financial products and services; and
(ii) Whether the activity enables the bank to use capacity acquired
for its banking operations or otherwise avoid economic loss or waste.
(2) The weight accorded each factor set out in paragraph (d)(1) of
this section depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.
0
4. Amend Sec. 7.1002 by:
0
a. Revising the heading in paragraph (a);
0
b. In paragraph (b)(6), removing the word ``and'';
0
c. In paragraph (b)(7)(ii), removing the period after ``specific
transaction'' and adding in its place ``; and''; and
d. Adding paragraph (b)(8).
The revision and addition reads as follows:
Sec. 7.1002 National bank acting as finder.
(a) In general. * * *
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(8) Acting as an electronic finder pursuant to Sec. 7.5002(a)(1).
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 7.1003 by:
0
a. Revising the section heading;
0
b. Revising the paragraph heading in paragraph (a); and
0
c. Adding paragraph (c).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 7.1003 Money lent at banking offices or at facilities other than
banking offices.
(a) In general. * * *
* * * * *
(c) Services on equivalent terms to those offered customers of
unrelated banks. An operating subsidiary owned by a national bank may
distribute loan proceeds from its own funds or bank funds directly to
the borrower in person at offices the operating subsidiary has
established without violating 12 U.S.C. 36, 12 U.S.C. 81 and 12 CFR
5.30, provided that the operating subsidiary provides similar services
on substantially similar terms and conditions to customers of
unaffiliated entities including unaffiliated banks.
0
6. Revise 7.1004 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1004 Establishment of a loan production office by a national
bank.
(a) In general. A national bank or its operating subsidiary may
engage in loan production activities at a site other than the main
office or a branch of the bank. A national bank or its operating
subsidiary may solicit loan customers, market loan products, assist
persons in completing application forms and related documents to obtain
a loan, originate and approve loans, make credit decisions regarding a
loan application, and offer other lending-related services such as loan
information and applications at a loan production office without
violating 12 U.S.C. 36 and 12 U.S.C. 81, provided that ``money'' is not
deemed to be ``lent'' at that site within the meaning of Sec. 7.1003
and the site does not accept deposits or pay withdrawals.
(b) Services of other persons. A national bank may use the services
of, and compensate, persons not employed by the bank in its loan
production activities.
Sec. 7.1005 [Removed and Reserved]
0
7. Remove and reserve Sec. 7.1005.
Sec. 7.1006 [Amended]
0
8. Amend Sec. 7.1006 by:
0
a. Revising the section heading by removing the words ``national
bank'';
0
b. Adding the words ``or Federal savings association'' after the words
``national bank'' wherever it appears in the first and second
sentences; and
0
c. Adding the words ``or savings association'' after the words
``provided that the bank'' in the second sentence.
Sec. 7.1009 [Removed and Reserved]
0
9. Remove and reserve Sec. 7.1009.
0
10. Revise Sec. 7.1010 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1010 Postal services by national banks and Federal savings
associations.
(a) In general. A national bank or Federal savings association may
provide postal services and receive income from those services. The
services performed are those permitted under applicable rules of the
United States Postal Service. These may include meter stamping of
letters and packages and the sale of related insurance. The national
bank or Federal savings association may advertise, develop, and extend
the services to attract customers to the institution.
(b) Postal regulations. A national bank or Federal savings
association providing postal services must do so in accordance with the
rules and regulations of the United States Postal Service. The national
bank or Federal savings association must keep the books and records of
the postal services separate from those of other banking operations.
Under 39 U.S.C. 404 and any regulations issued under that statute, the
United States Postal Service may inspect the books and records
pertaining to the postal services.
Sec. 7.1012 [Amended]
0
11. Amend Sec. 7.1012 by:
0
a. In paragraph (c)(1), removing the words ``pick up from, and
deliver'' and adding in its place the words ``pick up from and
deliver''; and
0
b. In paragraph (c)(2)(vi), removing the words ``back office'' and
adding in its place the words ``back-office''.
0
12. Revise Sec. 7.1015 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1015 National bank and Federal savings association investments
in small business investment companies.
(a) National banks. A national bank may invest in a small business
investment company (SBIC) or in any entity established solely to invest
in SBICs, including purchasing the stock of a SBIC, subject to
appropriate capital limitations (see e.g., 15 U.S.C. 682(b)), and may
receive the benefits of such stock ownership (e.g., stock dividends).
The receipt and retention of a dividend by a national bank from a SBIC
in the form of stock of a corporate borrower of the SBIC is not a
purchase of stock
[[Page 40821]]
within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh).
(b) Federal savings associations. Federal savings associations may
invest in a SBIC or in any entity established solely to invest in SBICs
as provided in 12 CFR 160.30.
(c) Qualifying SBIC. A national bank or Federal savings association
may invest in a SBIC that is either (1) already organized and has
obtained a license from the Small Business Administration, or (2) in
the process of being organized.
0
13. Amend Sec. 7.1016 by:
0
a. Revising the section heading;
0
b. Revising paragraph (a);
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1) introductory text, removing the word ``banks''
wherever it appears and adding in its place the words ``national banks
and Federal savings associations'';
0
d. Revising paragraph (b)(1)(iv);
0
e. In paragraph (b)(2)(ii), removing the word ``bank's'' and adding in
its place the words ``national bank's or Federal savings
association's'';
0
f. In paragraphs (b)(1)(iii)(B), (1)(iii)(C), (2)(i), (2)(iii), (3),
and (4), removing the word ``bank'' and adding in its place the words
``national bank or Federal savings association'';
0
g. In paragraphs (b)(1)(iii)(B), (2)(iii) and (4), adding the words
``or savings association's'' after the word ``bank's''; and
0
h. In paragraph(b)(2)(i), adding the words ``or savings association''
after the word ``bank'' wherever it appears.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 7.1016 Independent undertakings issued by a national bank or
Federal savings association to pay against documents.
(a) In general. A national bank or Federal savings association may
issue and commit to issue letters of credit and other independent
undertakings within the scope of applicable laws or rules of practice
recognized by law.\1\ Under such independent undertakings, the national
bank's or Federal savings association's obligation to honor depends
upon the presentation of specified documents and not upon
nondocumentary conditions or resolution of questions of fact or law at
issue between the applicant and the beneficiary. A national bank or
Federal savings association may also confirm or otherwise undertake to
honor or purchase specified documents upon their presentation under
another person's independent undertaking within the scope of such laws
or rules. As used in this section, the term national bank includes
Federal branches and agencies of a foreign bank.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Examples of such laws or rules of practice include: The
applicable version of Article 5 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)
(1962, as amended 1990) or revised Article 5 of the UCC (as amended
1995); the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits
(International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Publication No. 600 or any
applicable prior version); the Supplements to UCP 500 & 600 for
Electronic Presentation (eUCP v. 1.0, 1.1, & 2.0) (Supplements to
the Uniform Customs and Practices for Documentary Credits for
Electronic Presentation); International Standby Practices (ISP98)
(ICC Publication No. 590); the United Nations Convention on
Independent Guarantees and Stand-by Letters of Credit (adopted by
the U.N. General Assembly in 1995 and signed by the U.S. in 1997);
and the Uniform Rules for Bank-to-Bank Reimbursements Under
Documentary Credits (ICC Publication No. 725).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) * * * (1) * * *
* * * * *
(iv) The national bank or Federal savings association either should
be fully collateralized or have a post-honor right of reimbursement
from the applicant or from another issuer of an independent
undertaking. Alternatively, if the national bank's or Federal savings
association's undertaking is to purchase documents of title,
securities, or other valuable documents, the bank or savings
association should obtain a first priority right to realize on the
documents if the bank or savings association is not otherwise to be
reimbursed.
* * * * *
0
14. Revise Sec. 7.1021 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1021 Financial literacy programs not branches of national
banks
A financial literacy program is a program the principal purpose of
which is to be educational for members of the community. The premises
of, or a facility used by, a school or other organization at which a
national bank participates in a financial literacy program is not a
branch for purposes of 12 U.S.C. 36 provided the bank does not
establish and operate the premises or facility. The OCC considers
establishment and operation in this context on a case by case basis,
considering the facts and circumstances. However, the premises or
facility is not a branch of the national bank if the safe harbor test
in 12 CFR 7.1012(c)(2) applicable to messenger services established by
third parties is satisfied. The factor discussed in Sec.
7.1012(c)(2)(i) can be met if bank employee participation in the
financial literacy program consists of managing the program or
conducting or engaging in financial education activities provided the
school or other organization retains control over the program and over
the premises or facilities at which the program is held.
Sec. 7.1022 [Amended]
0
15. Amend Sec. 7.1022 by:
0
a. In paragraph (d), removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its
place the word ``may'' wherever it appears; and
0
b. In paragraph (e), removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its
place the word ``must'' and removing the words ``the effective date of
this regulation'' and adding in its place the words ``April 1, 2018''.
Sec. 7.1023 [Amended]
0
16. Amend Sec. 7.1023 by:
0
a. In paragraph (c), removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its
place the word ``may'' and removing the words ``federal savings
association'' and adding in its place the words ``Federal savings
association''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d):
0
i. Removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its place the word
``must'';
0
ii. Removing the words ``the effective date of this regulation'' and
adding in its place the words ``April 1, 2018''; and
0
iii. Removing the words ``federal savings association'' and adding in
its place the words ``Federal savings association''.
Sec. 7.1024 [Amended]
0
17. Amend redesignated Sec. 7.1024 by:
0
a. In paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and(ii), and (d), removing the word
``shall'' and adding in its place the word ``must'' wherever it
appears; and
0
b. In paragraph (e), removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its
place the word ``may''.
0
18. Add Sec. 7.1025 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1025 Tax equity finance transactions.
(a) Tax equity finance transactions. A national bank or Federal
savings association may engage in a tax equity finance transaction
pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh) and 1464 only if the transaction is
the functional equivalent of a loan, as provided in paragraph (c) of
this section, and the transaction satisfies applicable conditions in
paragraph (d) of this section.
(b) Definitions. For purposes of this section:
(1) Tax equity finance transaction means a transaction in which a
national bank or Federal savings association provides equity financing
to fund a project that generates tax credits and other tax benefits and
the use of an equity-based structure allows the transfer of those
credits and other tax benefits to the national bank or Federal savings
association.
(2) Capital and surplus has the same meaning that this term has in
12 CFR 32.2.
(c) Functional equivalent of a loan. A tax equity finance
transaction is the functional equivalent of a loan if:
[[Page 40822]]
(1) The structure of the transaction is necessary for making the
tax credits and other tax benefits available to the national bank or
Federal savings association;
(2) The transaction is of limited tenure and is not indefinite,
such as a limited investment interest required by law to obtain
continuing tax benefits;
(3) The tax benefits and other payments received by the national
bank or Federal savings association from the transaction repay the
investment and provide the implied rate of return;
(4) Consistent with paragraph (c)(3) of this section, the national
bank or Federal savings association does not rely on appreciation of
value in the project or property rights underlying the project for
repayment;
(5) The national bank or Federal savings association uses
underwriting and credit approval criteria and standards that are
substantially equivalent to the underwriting and credit approval
criteria and standards used for a traditional commercial loan;
(6) The national bank or Federal savings association is a passive
investor in the transaction and is unable to direct the affairs of the
project company; and
(7) The national bank or Federal savings association appropriately
accounts for the transaction initially and on an ongoing basis and has
documented contemporaneously its accounting assessment and conclusion.
(d) Conditions on tax equity finance transactions. A national bank
or Federal savings association may engage in tax equity finance
transactions only if:
(1) The national bank or Federal savings association cannot control
the sale of energy, if any, from the project;
(2) The national bank or Federal savings association limits the
total dollar amount of tax equity finance transactions undertaken
pursuant to this section to no more than five percent of its capital
and surplus, unless the OCC determines, by written approval of a
written request by the national bank or Federal savings association to
exceed the five percent limit, that a higher aggregate limit will not
pose an unreasonable risk to the national bank or Federal savings
association and that the tax equity finance transactions in the
national bank's or Federal savings association's portfolio will not be
conducted in an unsafe or unsound manner; provided, however, that in no
case may a national bank or Federal savings association's total dollar
amount of tax equity finance transactions undertaken pursuant to this
section exceed 15 percent of its capital and surplus;
(3) The national bank or Federal savings association has provided
written notification to the OCC prior to engaging in each tax equity
finance transaction that includes its evaluation of the risks posed by
the transaction; and
(4) The national bank or Federal savings association can identify,
measure, monitor, and control the associated risks of its tax equity
finance transaction activities individually and as a whole on an
ongoing basis to ensure that such activities are conducted in a safe
and sound manner.
(e) Applicable legal requirements. The transaction is subject to
the substantive legal requirements of a loan, including the lending
limits prescribed by 12 U.S.C. 84 and 12 U.S.C. 1464(u), as
appropriate, as implemented by 12 CFR 32, and if the active investor or
project sponsor of the transaction is an affiliate of the bank, to the
restrictions on transactions with affiliates prescribed by 12 U.S.C.
371c and 371c-1, as implemented by 12 CFR 223.
0
19. Add Sec. 7.1026 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1026 Payment systems memberships.
(a) In general. National banks and Federal savings associations may
become members of payment systems, subject to the requirements of this
section.
(b) Definitions. As used in this section:
(1) Appropriate OCC supervisory office means the OCC office that is
responsible for the supervision of a national bank or Federal savings
association, as described in subpart A of 12 CFR part 4;
(2) Member includes a national bank or Federal savings association
designated as a ``member,'' or ``participant,'' or other similar role
by a payment system, including by a payment system that requires the
national bank or Federal savings association to share in operational
losses or maintain a reserve with the payment system to offset
potential liability for operational losses;
(3) Open-ended liability refers to liability for operational losses
that is not capped under the rules of the payment system and includes
indemnifications provided to third parties as a condition of membership
in the payment system;
(4) Operational loss means a charge resulting from sources other
than defaults by other members of the payment system; and
(5) Payment system means ``financial market utility'' as defined in
12 U.S.C. 5462(6), wherever operating, and includes both retail and
wholesale payment systems. Payment system does not include a
derivatives clearing organization registered under the Commodity
Exchange Act, a clearing agency registered under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, or foreign organization that would be considered
a derivatives clearing organization or clearing agency were it
operating in the United States.
(c) Notice requirements.
(1) Prior notice required. A national bank or Federal savings
association must provide written notice to its appropriate OCC
supervisory office at least 30 days prior to joining a payment system
that exposes it to open-ended liability.
(2) After-the-fact notice. A national bank or Federal savings
association must provide written notice to its appropriate OCC
supervisory office within 30 days of joining a payment system that does
not expose it to open-ended liability.
(d) Content of notice.
(1) In general. A notice required by paragraph (c) of this section
must include representations that the national bank or Federal savings
association:
(i) Has complied with the safety and soundness review requirements
in paragraph (e)(1) of this section; and
(ii) Will comply with the safety and soundness review and
notification requirements in paragraphs (e)(2) and (3) of this section.
(2) Payment system limits on liability or no liability. A notice
filed under paragraph (c)(2) of this section also must include a
representation that either:
(i) The rules of the payment system do not impose liability for
operational losses on members; or
(ii) The national bank's or Federal savings association's liability
for operational losses is limited by the rules of the payment system to
specific and appropriate limits that do not exceed the lower of:
(A) the legal lending limit under 12 CFR 32; or
(B) the limit set for the bank or savings association by the OCC.
(e) Safety and soundness procedures.
(1) Prior to joining a payment system, a national bank or Federal
savings association must:
(i) Identify and evaluate the risks posed by membership in the
payment system, taking into account whether the liability of the bank
or savings association is limited; and
(ii) Ensure that it can measure, monitor, and control the risks
identified pursuant to paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section.
(2) After joining a payment system, a national bank or Federal
savings association must manage the risks of the payment system on an
ongoing basis. This ongoing risk management must:
[[Page 40823]]
(i) Identify and evaluate the risks posed by membership in the
payment system, taking into account whether the liability of the bank
or savings association is limited; and
(ii) Measure, monitor, and control the risks identified pursuant to
paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section.
(3) If the national bank or Federal savings association identifies
risks during the ongoing risk management required by paragraph (e)(2)
of this section that raise safety and soundness concerns, such as a
material change to the bank's liability or indemnification
responsibilities, the national bank or Federal savings association
must:
(i) Notify the appropriate OCC supervisory office as soon as the
safety and soundness concern is identified; and
(ii) Take appropriate actions to remediate the risk.
(4) A national bank or Federal savings association that believes
its open-ended liability is otherwise limited (e.g., by negotiated
agreements or laws of an appropriate jurisdiction) may consider its
liability to be limited for purposes of the reviews required by
paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this section so long as:
(i) Prior to joining the payment system, the bank or savings
association obtains an independent legal opinion that:
(A) Describes how the payment system allocates liability for
operational losses; and
(B) Concludes the potential liability for operational losses for
the national bank or Federal savings association is in fact limited to
specific and appropriate limits that do not exceed the lower of:
(1) The legal lending limit under 12 CFR 32; or
(2) The limit set for the bank or savings association by the OCC;
and
(ii) There are no material changes to the liability or
indemnification requirements of the bank or savings association since
the issuance of the independent legal opinion.
0
20. Add Sec. 7.1027 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1027 Establishment and operation of a remote service unit by a
national bank.
A remote service unit (RSU) is an automated or unstaffed facility,
operated by a customer of a bank with at most delimited assistance from
bank personnel, that conducts banking functions such as receiving
deposits, paying withdrawals, or lending money. A national bank may
establish and operate an RSU pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh). An RSU
includes an automated teller machine, automated loan machine, automated
device for receiving deposits, personal computer, telephone, other
similar electronic devices, and drop boxes. An RSU may be equipped with
a telephone or tele-video device that allows contact with bank
personnel. An RSU is not a ``branch'' within the meaning of 12 U.S.C.
36(j), and is not subject to State geographic or operational
restrictions or licensing laws.
0
21. Add Sec. 7.1028 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1028 Establishment and operation of a deposit production
office by a national bank.
(a) In general. A national bank or its operating subsidiary may
engage in deposit production activities at a site other than the main
office or a branch of the bank. A national bank or its operating
subsidiary may solicit deposits, provide information about deposit
products, and assist persons in completing application forms and
related documents to open a deposit account at a deposit production
office (DPO). A DPO is not a branch within the meaning of 12 U.S.C.
36(j) and 12 CFR 5.30(d)(1) so long as it does not receive deposits,
pay withdrawals, or make loans. All deposit and withdrawal transactions
of a bank customer using a DPO must be performed by the customer,
either in person at the main office or a branch office of the bank, or
by mail, electronic transfer, or a similar method of transfer.
(b) Services of other persons. A national bank may use the services
of, and compensate, persons not employed by the bank in its deposit
production activities.
0
22. Add Sec. 7.1029 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1029 Combination of national bank loan production office,
deposit production office, and remote service unit.
A location at which a national bank operates a loan production
office (LPO), a deposit production office (DPO), and a remote service
unit (RSU) is not a ``branch'' within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. 36(j) by
virtue of that combination. Since an LPO, DPO, or RSU is not,
individually, a branch under 12 U.S.C. 36(j), any combination of these
facilities at one location does not create a branch. The RSU at such a
combined location must be primarily operated by the customer with at
most delimited assistance from bank personnel.
0
23. Add Sec. 7.1030 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.1030 Permissible derivatives activities for national banks.
(a) Authority. This section is issued pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 24
(Seventh). A national bank may only engage in derivatives transactions
in accordance with the requirements of this section.
(b) Definitions. For purposes of this section:
(1) Customer-driven means a transaction is entered into for a
customer's valid and independent business purpose (and a customer-
driven transaction does not include a transaction the principal purpose
of which is to deliver to a national bank assets that the national bank
could not invest in directly);
(2) Perfectly-matched means two back-to back derivatives
transactions that offset risk with respect to all economic terms (e.g.,
amount, maturity, duration, and underlying);
(3) Portfolio-hedged means a portfolio of derivatives transactions
that are hedged based on net unmatched positions or exposures in the
portfolio;
(4) Physical hedging or physically-hedged means holding title to or
acquiring ownership of an asset (for example, by warehouse receipt or
book-entry) solely to manage the risks arising out of permissible
customer-driven derivatives transactions;
(5) Physical settlement or physically-settled means accepting title
to or acquiring ownership of an asset;
(6) Transitory title transfer means accepting and immediately
relinquishing title to an asset; and
(7) Underlying means the reference asset, rate, obligation, or
index on which the payment obligation(s) between counterparties to a
derivative transaction is based.
(c) In general. A national bank may engage in the following
derivatives transactions after notice in accordance with paragraph (d)
of this section, as applicable:
(1) Derivatives transactions with payments based on underlyings a
national bank is permitted to purchase directly as an investment;
(2) Derivatives transactions with any underlying to hedge the risks
arising from bank-permissible activities;
(3) Derivatives transactions as a financial intermediary with any
underlying that are customer-driven, cash-settled, and either
perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged;
(4) Derivatives transactions as a financial intermediary with any
underlying that are customer-driven, physically-settled by transitory
title transfer, and either perfectly-matched or portfolio-hedged; and
(5) Derivatives transactions as a financial intermediary with any
underlying that are customer-driven, physically-settled (other than by
transitory title transfer), physically-hedged, and either perfectly-
matched or portfolio-hedged, and provided that (i) the national bank
does not take physical
[[Page 40824]]
delivery of any commodity by receipt of physical quantities of the
commodity on bank premises and (ii) physical hedging activities meet
the requirements of paragraph (e) of this section.
(d) Notice procedure. (1) A national bank must provide notice to
its Examiner-in-Charge prior to engaging in any of the following with
respect to derivatives transactions with payments based on underlyings
that a national bank is not permitted to purchase directly as an
investment:
(i) Engaging in derivatives hedging activities pursuant to
paragraph (c)(2) of this section;
(ii) Expanding the bank's derivatives hedging activities pursuant
to paragraph (c)(2) of this section to include a new category of
underlying for derivatives transactions;
(iii) Engaging in customer-driven financial intermediation
derivatives activities pursuant to paragraphs (c)(3), (4) or (5) of
this section; and
(iv) Expanding the bank's customer-driven financial intermediation
derivatives activities pursuant to paragraphs (c)(3), (4) or (5) of
this section to include any new category of underlyings.
(2) The notice pursuant to paragraph (d)(1) of this section must be
submitted in writing at least 30 days before the national bank
commences the activity and include the following information:
(i) A detailed description of the proposed activity, including the
relevant underlyings;
(ii) The anticipated start date of the activity; and
(iii) A detailed description of the bank's risk management system
(policies, processes, personnel, and control systems) for identifying,
measuring, monitoring, and controlling the risks of the activity.
(e) Additional requirements for physical hedging activities. (1) A
national bank engaging in physical hedging activities pursuant to
paragraph (c)(5) of this section must hold the underlying solely to
hedge risks arising from derivatives transactions originated by
customers for the customers' valid and independent business purposes.
(2) The physical hedging activities must offer a cost-effective
means to hedge risks arising from permissible banking activities.
(3) The national bank must not take anticipatory or maintain
residual positions in the underlying except as necessary for the
orderly establishment or unwinding of a hedging position.
(4) The national bank must not acquire equity securities for
hedging purposes that constitute more than 5 percent of a class of
voting securities of any issuer.
(5) With respect to physical hedging involving commodities:
(i) A national bank's physical position in a particular physical
commodity (including, as applicable, delivery point, purity, grade,
chemical composition, weight, and size) must not be more that 5 percent
of the gross notional value of the bank's derivatives that are in that
particular physical commodity and allow for physical settlement within
30 days. Title to commodities acquired and immediately sold by a
transitory title transfer does not count against the 5 percent limit;
and
(ii) The physical position must more effectively reduce risk than a
cash-settled hedge referencing the same commodity.
0
24. Amend Sec. 7.2000 by:
0
a. Revising the section heading;
0
b. Revising paragraph (a);
0
c. In paragraph (b):
0
i. Removing the word ``procedures'' wherever it appears and adding in
its place the word ``provisions'';
0
ii. Removing the words ``the state in which the main office of the
bank'' and adding in its place the words ``any State in which the main
office or any branch of the bank'';
0
iii. Removing the words ``the state in which the holding company of the
bank'' and adding in its place the words ``the State in which a holding
company of the bank''; and
0
iv. Removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its place the word
``must'';
0
d. Redesignating paragraph (c) as paragraph (d) and revising it; and
0
e. Adding a new paragraph (c).
The addition and revisions are set forth below.
Sec. 7.2000 Corporate governance.
(a) In general. The corporate governance provisions in a national
bank's articles of association and bylaws and the bank's conduct of its
corporate governance affairs must comply with applicable Federal
banking statutes and regulations and safe and sound banking practices.
* * * * *
(c) Continued use of former holding company State. A national bank
that has elected to follow the corporate governance provisions of the
law of the State in which its holding company is incorporated may
continue to use those provisions even if the bank is no longer
controlled by that holding company.
(d) Request for OCC staff position. A national bank may request the
views of OCC staff on the permissibility of a national bank's adoption
of a particular State corporate governance provision. Requests must
include the following information:
(1) The name of the national bank;
(2) Citation to the State statutes or regulations involved;
(3) A discussion as to whether a similarly situated State bank is
subject to or may adopt the corporate governance provision;
(4) Identification of all Federal banking statutes or regulations
that are on the same subject as, or otherwise have a bearing on, the
subject of the proposed State corporate governance provision; and
(5) An analysis of how the proposed practice is not inconsistent
with applicable Federal statutes or regulations and is not inconsistent
with bank safety and soundness.
0
25. Add Sec. 7.2001 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.2001 National bank adoption of anti-takeover provisions.
(a) In general. Pursuant to 12 CFR 7.2000(b), a national bank may
adopt anti-takeover provisions included in State corporate governance
law if the provisions are not inconsistent with Federal banking
statutes or regulations and not inconsistent with bank safety and
soundness.
(b) State anti-takeover provisions that are not inconsistent with
Federal banking statutes or regulations. State anti-takeover provisions
that are not inconsistent with Federal banking statues or regulations
include the following:
(1) Restriction on business combinations with interested
shareholders. State provisions that prohibit, or that permit the
corporation to prohibit in its certificate of incorporation or other
governing document, the corporation from engaging in a business
combination with an interested shareholder or any related entity for a
specified period of time from the date on which the shareholder first
becomes an interested shareholder, subject to certain exceptions such
as board approval. An interested shareholder is one that owns an amount
of stock specified in the State provision.
(2) Poison pill. State provisions that provide, or that permit the
corporation to provide in its certificate of incorporation or other
governing document, that all the shareholders, other than the hostile
acquiror, have the right to purchase additional stock at a substantial
discount upon the occurrence of a triggering event.
(3) Requiring all shareholder action to be taken at a meeting.
State provisions that provide, or that permit the corporation to
provide in its certificate
[[Page 40825]]
of incorporation or other governing document, that all actions to be
taken by shareholders must occur at a meeting and that shareholders may
not take action by written consent.
(4) Limits on shareholders' authority to call special meetings.
State provisions that provide, or that permit the corporation to
provide in its certificate of incorporation or other governing
document, that:
(i) Only the board of directors, and not the shareholders, have the
right to call special meetings of the shareholders; or
(ii) If shareholders have the right to call special meetings, a
high percentage of shareholders is needed to call the meeting.
(5) Shareholder removal of a director only for cause. State
provisions that provide, or that permit the corporation to provide in
its certificate of incorporation or other governing document, that
shareholders may remove a director only for cause, and not both for
cause and without cause.
(c) State anti-takeover provisions that are inconsistent with
Federal banking statutes or regulations. The following State anti-
takeover provisions are inconsistent with Federal banking statutes or
regulations:
(1) Supermajority voting requirements. State provisions that
require, or that permit the corporation to require in its certificate
of incorporation or other governing document, a supermajority of the
shareholders to approve specified matters are inconsistent when applied
to matters for which Federal banking statutes or regulations specify
the required level of shareholder approval.
(2) Restrictions on a shareholder's right to vote all the shares it
owns. State provisions that prohibit, or that permit the corporation in
its certificate of incorporation or other governing document to
prohibit, a person from voting shares acquired that increase their
percentage of ownership of the company's stock above a certain level
are inconsistent when applied to shareholder votes governed by 12
U.S.C. 61.
(d) Bank safety and soundness. (1) In general. Except as provided
in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, any State corporate governance
provision, including anti-takeover provisions, that would render more
difficult or discourage an injection of capital by purchase of bank
stock, a merger, the acquisition of the bank, a tender offer, a proxy
contest, the assumption of control by a holder of a large block of the
bank's stock, or the removal of the incumbent board of directors or
management is inconsistent with bank safety and soundness if:
(i) The bank is less than adequately capitalized (as defined in 12
CFR part 6);
(ii) The bank is in troubled condition (as defined in 12 CFR
5.51(c)(7));
(iii) Grounds for the appointment of a receiver under 12 U.S.C. 191
are present; or
(iv) The bank is otherwise in less than satisfactory condition, as
determined by the OCC.
(2) Exception. Anti-takeover provisions are not inconsistent with
bank safety and soundness if, at the time the bank adopts the
provisions:
(i) The bank is not subject to any of the conditions in paragraph
(d)(1) of this section; and
(ii) The bank includes, in its articles of association or its
bylaws, as applicable pursuant to paragraph (f) of this section, a
limitation that would make the provisions ineffective if:
(A) The conditions in paragraph (d)(1) of this section exist; or
(B) The OCC otherwise directs the bank not to follow the provision
for supervisory reasons.
(e) Case-by-case review. (1) OCC Determination. Based on the
substance of the provision or the individual circumstances of a
national bank, the OCC may determine that a State anti-takeover
provision, as proposed or adopted by a bank, is:
(i) Inconsistent with Federal banking statutes or regulations,
notwithstanding paragraph (b) of this section; or
(ii) Inconsistent with bank safety and soundness other than as
provided in paragraph (d) of this section.
(2) Review. The OCC may initiate a review, or a bank may request
OCC review pursuant to 12 CFR 7.2000(d), of a State anti-takeover
provision.
(f) Method of adoption for anti-takeover provisions. (1) Board and
shareholder approval. A national bank must follow the provisions for
approval by the board of directors and approval of shareholders for the
adoption of an anti-takeover provision in the State corporate
governance law it has elected to follow. However, if the provision is
included in the bank's articles of association, the bank's shareholders
must approve the amendment of the articles pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 21a,
even if the State law does not require approval by the shareholders.
(2) Documentation. If the State corporate governance law requires
the anti-takeover provision to be in the company's articles of
incorporation, certificate of incorporation, or similar document, the
national bank must include the provision in its articles of
association. If the State corporate governance law does not require the
provision to be in the company's articles of incorporation, certificate
of incorporation, or similar document, but allows it to be in the
bylaws, then the national bank must include the provision in either its
articles of association or in its bylaws, provided, however, that if
the State corporate governance law requires shareholder approval for
changes to the corporation's bylaws, then the national bank must
include the provision in its articles of association.
Sec. 7.2002 [Amended]
0
26. Amend Sec. 7.2002 by adding the words ``for shareholder voting''
after the word ``proxy'' wherever it appears.
0
27. Amend Sec. 7.2005 by:
0
a. Revising the heading in paragraph (a); and
0
b. Removing in paragraph (c)(3)(ii), the word ``shall'' and adding in
its place the word ``must''.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 7.2005 Ownership of stock necessary to qualify as director.
(a) In general. * * *
* * * * *
Sec. 7.2006 [Amended]
0
28. Amend Sec. 7.2006 in the first sentence by removing the word
``shall'' and adding in its place the word ``must''.
Sec. 7.2008 [Amended]
0
29. Amend Sec. 7.2008 by:
0
a. In paragraph (a), removing the word ``state'' and adding in its
place the word ``State''; and
0
b. In paragraph (b), removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its
place the word ``must'' wherever it appears.
Sec. 7.2009 [Amended]
0
30. Amend Sec. 7.2009 by removing the word ``shall'' and adding in its
place the word ``must''.
Sec. 7.2010 [Amended]
0
31. Amend Sec. 7.2010 in the first sentence by removing the word
``shall'' and adding in its place the word ``must''.
0
32. Revise Sec. 7.2012 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.2012 President as director.
Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 76, the person serving as, or in the function
of, president of a national bank, regardless of title, must be a member
of the board of directors. A director other than the person serving as,
or in the function of, president may be elected chairman of the board.
0
33. Revise Sec. 7.2014 to read as follows:
[[Page 40826]]
Sec. 7.2014 Indemnification of institution-affiliated parties.
(a) Indemnification under State law. Subject to the limitations of
paragraph (b) of this section, a national bank or Federal savings
association may indemnify an institution-affiliated party for damages
and expenses, including the advancement of expenses and legal fees, in
accordance with the law of the State the bank or savings association
has designated for its corporate governance pursuant to Sec. 7.2000(b)
(for national banks), 12 CFR 5.21(j)(3)(iii) (for Federal mutual
savings associations), or 12 CFR 5.22(j)(2)(iii) (for Federal Stock
savings associations), provided such payments are consistent with safe
and sound banking practices. The term ``institution-affiliated party''
has the same meaning as set forth at 12 U.S.C. 1813(u).
(b) Administrative proceedings or civil actions initiated by
Federal banking agencies. With respect to an administrative proceeding
or civil action initiated by any Federal banking agency, a national
bank or Federal savings association may only make or agree to make
indemnification payments to an institution-affiliated party that are
reasonable and consistent with the requirements of 12 U.S.C. 1828(k)
and the implementing regulations thereunder.
(c) Written agreement required for advancement. Before advancing
funds to an institutional-affiliated party under this section, a
national bank or Federal savings association must obtain a written
agreement that the institution-affiliated party will reimburse the bank
or savings association, as appropriate, for any portion of that
indemnification that the institution-affiliated party is ultimately
found not to be entitled to under 12 U.S.C. 1828(k) and the
implementing regulations thereunder, except to the extent that the
bank's or savings association's expenses have been reimbursed by an
insurance policy or fidelity bond.
(d) Insurance premiums. A national bank or Federal savings
association may provide for the payment of reasonable premiums for
insurance covering the expenses, legal fees, and liability of
institution-affiliated parties to the extent that the expenses, fees,
or liability could be indemnified under this section.
0
34. Amend Sec. 7.2016 by:
0
a. Revising the section heading;
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (a) as paragraph (a)(1) and adding a
paragraph heading to paragraph (a);
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (b) as paragraph (a)(2); and
0
d. Adding a new paragraph (b).
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 7.2016 Restricting transfer of stock and record dates; stock
certificates.
(a) Restricting transfer of stock and record dates.
(b) Bank stock certificates. (1) A national bank may prescribe the
manner in which its stock must be transferred in its bylaws or articles
of association. A bank issuing stock in certificated form must comply
with the requirements of 12 U.S.C. 52, including as to:
(i) The name and location of the bank;
(ii) The name of the holder of record of the stock represented
thereby;
(iii) The number and class of shares which the certificate
represents;
(iv) If the bank issues more than one class of stock, the
respective rights, preferences, privileges, voting rights, powers,
restrictions, limitations, and qualifications of each class of stock
issued (unless incorporated by reference to the articles of
association);
(v) Signatures of the president and cashier of the bank, or such
other officers as the bylaws of the bank provide; and
(vi) The seal of the bank.
(2) The requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(v) of this section may be
met through the use of electronic means or by facsimile.
Sec. Sec. 7.2017 through 7.2018 [Removed]
0
35. Remove Sec. Sec. 7.2017 through 7.2018.
Sec. 7.2020 [Removed]
0
36. Remove Sec. 7.2020.
Sec. 7.2022 [Amended]
0
37. Amend Sec. 7.2022 by removing the word ``state'' and adding in its
place the word ``State''.
Sec. 7.2024 [Amended]
0
38. Amend Sec. 7.2024 paragraphs (a) and (c) by removing the word
``shall'' and adding in its place the word ``must'' wherever it
appears.
0
39. Add Sec. 7.2025 to read as follows:
Sec. 7.2025 Capital stock-related activities of a national bank.
(a) In general. A national bank must obtain the necessary
shareholder approval required by 12 U.S.C. 51a, 57, or 59 for any
change in its permanent capital. An increase or decrease in the amount
of a national bank's common or preferred stock is a change in permanent
capital subject to the notice and approval requirements of 12 CFR 5.46
and applicable law. A national bank may obtain the required shareholder
approval of changes in permanent capital, as provided in paragraphs
(b), (c), and (d) of this section.
(b) Issuance of previously approved and authorized common stock. In
compliance with 12 U.S.C. 57, a national bank may issue common stock up
to an amount previously approved and authorized in the national bank's
articles of association by holders of two-thirds of the national bank's
shares without obtaining additional shareholder approval for each
subsequent issuance within the authorized amount.
(c) Issuance, Repurchase, and Redemption of Preferred Stock
Pursuant to Certain Procedures. Subject to the requirements of 12
U.S.C. 51a and 59, a national bank may adopt procedures to authorize
the board of directors to issue, determine the terms of, repurchase,
and redeem one or more series of preferred stock, if permitted by the
corporate governance provisions adopted by the bank under 12 CFR
7.2000. To satisfy the shareholder approval requirements of 12 U.S.C.
51a and 59, the adoption of such procedures must be approved by
shareholders in advance through an amendment to the national bank's
articles of association. Any amendment to a national bank's articles of
association that authorizes both the issuance and the repurchase and
redemption of shares must be approved by holders of two-thirds of the
national bank's shares.
(d) Share repurchase programs. Subject to the requirements of 12
U.S.C. 59, a national bank may establish a program for the repurchase,
from time to time, of the national bank's common or preferred stock, if
permitted by the corporate governance provisions adopted by the bank
under 12 CFR 7.2000. To satisfy the shareholder approval requirement of
12 U.S.C. 59, the repurchase program must be approved in advance by the
holders of two-thirds of the national bank's shares, including through
an amendment to the national bank's articles of association that
authorizes the board of directors to repurchase the national bank's
common or preferred stock from time to time under board-determined
parameters that can limit the frequency, type, aggregate limit, or
purchase price of repurchases.
(e) Preferred Stock Features. A national bank's preferred stock may
be cumulative or non-cumulative and may or may not have voting rights
on one or more series.
0
40. Revise the heading for subpart C of this part to read as follows:
Subpart C--National Bank and Federal Savings Association Operations
0
41. Revise Sec. 7.3000 to read as follows:
[[Page 40827]]
Sec. 7.3000 National bank and Federal savings association banking
hours and closings.
(a) Banking hours. The board of directors of a national bank or
Federal savings association, or an equivalent person or committee of a
Federal branch or agency, should review its hours of operations for
customers and, independently of any other bank, savings association, or
Federal branch or agency, take appropriate action to establish a
schedule of operating hours for customers.
(b) Emergency closings declared by the Comptroller. Pursuant to 12
U.S.C. 95(b)(1) and 1463(a)(1)(A), the Comptroller of the Currency
(Comptroller), may declare any day a legal holiday if emergency
conditions exist. That day is a legal holiday for national banks,
Federal savings associations, and Federal branches or agencies in the
affected geographic area (i.e., throughout the United States, in a
State, or in part of a State), and national banks, Federal savings
associations, and Federal branches and agencies may temporarily limit
or suspend operations at their affected offices, unless the Comptroller
by written order directs otherwise. Emergency conditions may be caused
by acts of nature or of man and may include natural and other
disasters, public health or safety emergencies, civil and municipal
emergencies, and cyber threats or other unauthorized intrusions (e.g.,
severe flooding, a pandemic, terrorism, a cyber-attack on bank systems,
or a power emergency declared by a local power company or government
requesting that businesses in the affected area close). The Comptroller
may issue a proclamation authorizing the emergency closing in
anticipation of the emergency condition, at the time of the emergency
condition, or soon thereafter. In the absence of a Comptroller
declaration of a bank holiday, a national bank, Federal savings
associations, or Federal branch or agency may choose to temporarily
close offices in response to an emergency condition. The national bank,
Federal savings associations, or Federal branch or agency should notify
the OCC of such temporary closure as soon as feasible.
(c) Emergency and ceremonial closings declared by a State or State
official. In the event a State or a legally authorized State official
declares any day to be a legal holiday for emergency or ceremonial
reasons in that State or part of the State, that same day is a legal
holiday for national banks, Federal savings associations, and Federal
branches or agencies or their offices in the affected geographic area.
National banks, Federal savings associations, and Federal branches or
agencies or their affected offices may close their affected offices or
remain open on such a State-designated holiday, unless the Comptroller
by written order directs otherwise.
(d) Liability. A national bank, Federal savings association, or
Federal branch or agency should assure that all liabilities or other
obligations under the applicable law due to its closing are satisfied.
(e) Definition. For the purpose of this subpart, the term ``State''
means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, the
Virgin Islands, American Samoa, the Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands, or any other territory or possession of the United States.
Sec. 7.3001 [Amended]
0
42. Amend Sec. 7.3001 by:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(1), removing the words ``Lease excess space'' and
adding in its place the words ``Consistent with Sec. 7.1024 of this
title, lease excess space'';
0
b. In paragraph (c) introductory text, removing the word ``shall'' and
adding in its place the word ``must''; and
0
c. In paragraph (c)(3), removing the word ``state'' and adding in its
place the word ``State''.
Sec. Sec. 7.4003 through 7.4005 [Removed]
0
43. Remove Sec. Sec. 7.4003 through 7.4005.
Sec. 7.4010 [Amended]
0
44. Amend the section heading for Sec. 7.4010 by removing the word
``state'' and adding in its place the word ``State''.
Sec. 7.5001 [Removed]
0
45. Remove Sec. 7.5001.
PART 145--FEDERAL SAVINGS ASSOCIATIONS--OPERATIONS
0
46. The authority citation for part 145 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1462a, 1463, 1464, 1828, 5412(b)(2)(B).
Sec. 145.121 [Removed]
0
47. Remove Sec. 145.121.
PART 160--LENDING AND INVESTMENT
0
48. The authority citation for part 160 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1462a, 1463, 1464, 1467a, 1701j-3, 1828,
3803, 3806, 5412(b)(2)(B); 42 U.S.C. 4106.
Sec. 160.50 [Removed]
0
49. Remove Sec. 160.50.
Sec. 160.120 [Removed]
0
50. Remove Sec. 160.120.
Brian P. Brooks,
Acting Comptroller of the Currency.
[FR Doc. 2020-12435 Filed 7-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-33-P