Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Congressional Letter: NCUA's FOM Proposal Should Call Into Question CU Tax Exemption

Fifty-three state bankers associations wrote to the congressional taxation committees on February 5 and urged them to “investigate the tax implications of the latest increase in powers” NCUA has proposed for credit unions.

According to the letter, this sweeping field of membership (FOM) proposal will "exponentially explode this already-sizeable tax subsidy."

“The proposed changes should call into question whether the 82 year-old tax exemption is appropriate in the modern era,” the groups said, calling for Congress to level the playing field between taxpaying banks and tax-exempt credit unions that are otherwise virtually identical.

Read the letter.


  1. Banks in the 1930s served single towns and communities. Interstate banking was never imagined. In fact, not permitted until late in the 20th Century. No one ever thought that banks could be trillion dollar institutions. TBTF institutions that almost brought town the US economy. Bankers cannot have it both ways. Either go back to the origins of banks in the '30s if you push CUs to that time or allow CUs to serve 21st Century consumers in the same ways that banks do. Again, please remember that there are still limitations on credit unions powers/authorities that bankers do not have. Would bankers be able to live with an 18% interest rate cap on credit cards and other long-term loans? A maturity limit of 20 years for most fixed rate 2nd mortgages? No ability to have a trust company under the same roof with the same ownership? Just to name a few.

  2. Waaa. Waaaa. Boo hoo. Boo hoo. Mommy, I want everything the banks have but maintain my federal tax exemption. They won't let me have it!!
    Waaa. Waaa.
    Mommy. Mommy, tell them to stop!

    1. A childish response to a legitimate statement; I'm not surprised. The author of the comment pointed out some of the limitations credit unions have that banks don't. Perhaps comprehension is something you struggle with?

    2. Probably, like perhaps the whole country, it's hard to comprehend the incessant whining by credit unions on all their limitations but still don't pay a federal tax on income.
      Would think by now, it would dawn on credit unions, "no tickee, no takee".
      Comprende that.

    3. To the contrary, the incessant whining seems to be coming from you and the individuals whom Keith represents. "No tickee, no takee", you say? Well, it sure doesn't seem to be working out that way now does it?

  3. My comment about differences dealt with Dr. Leggett's words about "level the playing field between taxpaying banks and tax-exempt credit unions that are otherwise virtually identical" when they are not "virtually identical." Similar almost identical, maybe.



The content is provided for educational purposes only, with the understanding that neither the authors, contributors, nor the publishers of this site are engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other expert or professional services. If legal or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Comments appearing in response to articles appearing on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the ABA. ABA makes no representations regarding the truth or accuracy of commentary or opinions that may be posted in response to the articles that appear on this website.

The inclusion herein of any link to a website, either in the text of an article or in a comment, does not denote any approval, sponsorship, or endorsement by the ABA, and ABA is not responsible for the content or opinions expressed on those linked websites or related commentary. This content is not licensed to third parties sites and is not affiliated with any third party site. Any reference to the author or this content on any third party site on the Internet is not authorized by the ABA.

It is the policy of the American Bankers Association to comply fully with all antitrust laws. Certain discussions should be considered off-limits, including those that contain competitively sensitive data such as price and cost information, or statements that could be construed as reflecting an attempt or desire to control or influence a particular market or markets. Future pricing or other prospective competitive information should never be shared.