Tuesday, December 15, 2015

Credit Union Journal: NCUA Had One 'Whopper Year' On Regulatory Front in 2015

Credit Union Journal wrote that 2015 was a noteworthy year on the regulatory front for the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).

With the exception of NCUA' controversial risk-based capital rule, which the credit union industry opposed, the agency was active in easing the regulatory burden on credit unions.

NCUA provided regulatory relief to a number of credit unions by doubling the asset threshold size for a small credit union designation to $100 million.

Also, NCUA eliminated its fixed asset rule.

Furthermore, NCUA proposed sweeping changes to its member business lending rule and field of membership regulation, which the agency will likely finalize in 2016.

As I told Credit Union Journal, "Debbie Matz said she was going to [provide relief], and she delivered."

Read the story (subscription required).

4 comments:

  1. You left out supplemental capital.
    NCUA thwarting the will of Congress and exploring time and again that:
    They're accountable to no one and rogue.
    Congress has now "will".
    Congress is dysfunctional.
    Bank lobby is ineffective.
    Credit union lobby (CUNA and Nafcu) are less effective than bank lobby.
    NCUA is regulator, insurer and lobbyist.
    NCUA remains unaccountable for lack of transparency on corporate credit union liability, overhead transfer, budget justification.
    What are the "true up" numbers?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Really? For FCUs above $100M, there was little relief. The five percent cap on fixed assets was not a major rule. RBC will be the "reg of the next few years" as CUs begin to adjust operations to meet the requirements. Matz has not "delivered" to larger FCUs. When you add the burdens imposed by CFPB, the regulatory burden on most FCUs increased. Just means "The Compliance Officers Employment Act of 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019" is in full effect.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We in the credit union community would like her to deliver...her resignation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I second that thought. Or have President Obama fire her. He has that authority since her term has ended. (remember President Clinton fired Norm D'Amours after his term ended)

      Delete

 

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.