Tuesday, April 10, 2018

NCUA's Metsger Criticizes Judge's Decision Invalidating Portions of Its FOM Rule

In an April 5 speech before the Minnesota Credit Union Network, National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) Board member Metsger delivered critical remarks regarding a recent decision by a federal judge invalidating portion of NCUA's new field of membership (FOM) rule.

The American Bankers Association sued NCUA over four provisions in the agency's FOM rule. The federal judge invalidated two of the provisions, while upholding two other provisions.

The federal judge overturned the agency's provision allowing rural district charters to serve rural areas with populations of up to one million people, up from the old limit of 250,000. The judge also overturned the provision that defined a Combined Statistical Area with a population up to 2.5 million people as a de facto local well-defined community.

However, Metsger did not mince his words expressing his disapproval of the judge's decision. He stated that judge's decision was only "half right."

Metsger argued that the two overturned provisions of the FOM rule were neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Metsger was also critical of the judge's ruling because it failed to give deference to the agency in interpreting the Federal Credit Union Act.

He further commented that the agency adhered to the law, because no member of Congress objected to the rule or even introduced a resolution to veto the rule.

In addition with respect to the rural district definition, Metsger argued that banks are abandoning rural America and the expansion of the rural district definition was "designed to solve very real financial access problems for residents of rural America."

Metsger's harshest comments were directed at the American Bankers Association and the banking industry. He referred to the banking industry as protectionist, seeking to deny consumers access to not-for-profit credit unions.

NCUA has 60-days to decide whether it will appeal the judge's decision.

Below is the speech.


No comments:

Post a Comment

 

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.