Title 12—Banks and Banking--Volume 1
PART 225—BANK HOLDING COMPANIES AND CHANGE IN BANK CONTROL (REGULATION Y)
§ 225.124   Foreign bank holding companies.
(a) Effective December 1, 1971, the Board of Governors has added a new § 225.4(g) to Regulation Y implementing its authority under section 4(c)(9) of the Bank Holding Company Act. The Board's views on some questions that have arisen in connection with the meaning of terms used in § 225.4(g) are set forth in paragraphs (b) through (g) of this section.
(b) The term “activities” refers to nonbanking activities and does not include the banking activities that foreign banks conduct in the United States through branches or agencies licensed under the banking laws of any State of the United States or the District of Columbia.
(c) A company (including a bank holding company) will not be deemed to be engaged in “activities” in the United States merely because it exports (or imports) products to (or from) the United States, or furnishes services or finances goods or services in the United States, from locations outside the United States. A company is engaged in “activities” in the United States if it owns, leases, maintains, operates, or controls any of the following types of facilities in the United States:
(1) A factory,
(2) A wholesale distributor or purchasing agency,
(3) A distribution center,
(4) A retail sales or service outlet,
(5) A network of franchised dealers,
(6) A financing agency, or
(7) Similar facility for the manufacture, distribution, purchasing, furnishing, or financing of goods or services locally in the United States.
(d) In the Board's opinion, section 4 (a)(1) of the Bank Holding Company Act applies to ownership or control of shares of stock as an investment and does not apply to ownership or control of shares of stock in the capacity of an underwriter or dealer in securities. Underwriting or dealing in shares of stock are nonbanking activities prohibited to bank holding companies by section 4(a)(2) of the Act, unless otherwise exempted. Under § 225.4(g) of Regulation Y, foreign bank holding companies are exempt from the prohibitions of section 4 of the Act with respect to their activities outside the United States; thus foreign bank holding companies may underwrite or deal in shares of stock (including shares of United States issuers) to be distributed outside the United States, provided that shares so acquired are disposed of within a reasonable time.
(e) A foreign bank holding company does not “indirectly” own voting shares by reason of the ownership or control of such voting shares by any company in which it has a noncontrolling interest. A foreign bank holding company may, however, “indirectly” control such voting shares if its noncontrolling interest in such company is accompanied by other arrangements that, in the Board's judgment, result in control of such shares by the bank holding company. The Board has made one exception to this general approach. A foreign bank holding company will be considered to indirectly own or control voting shares of a bank if that bank holding company acquires more than 5 percent of any class of voting shares of another bank holding company. A bank holding company may make such an acquisition only with prior approval of the Board.
(f) A company is “indirectly” engaged in activities in the United States if any of its subsidiaries (whether or not incorporated under the laws of this country) is engaged in such activities. A company is not “indirectly” engaged in activities in the United States by reason of a noncontrolling interest in a company engaged in such activities.
(g) Under the foregoing rules, a foreign bank holding company may have a noncontrolling interest in a foreign company that has a U.S. subsidiary (but is not engaged in the securities business in the United States) if more than half of the foreign company's consolidated assets and revenues are located and derived outside the United States. For the purpose of such determination, the assets and revenues of the United States subsidiary would be counted among the consolidated assets and revenues of the foreign company to the extent required or permitted by generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. The foreign bank holding company would not, however, be permitted to “indirectly” control voting shares of the said U.S. subsidiary, as might be the case if there are other arrangements accompanying its noncontrolling interest in the foreign parent company that, in the Board's judgment, result in control of such shares by the bank holding company.
§ 225.125   Investment adviser activities.
(a) Effective February 1, 1972, the Board of Governors amended § 225.4(a) of Regulation Y to add “serving as investment adviser, as defined in section 2(a)(20) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, to an investment company registered under that Act” to the list of activities it has determined to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. During the course of the Board's consideration of this amendment several questions arose as to the scope of such activity, particularly in view of certain restrictions imposed by sections 16, 20, 21, and 32 of the Banking Act of 1933 (12 U.S.C. 24, 377, 378, 78) (sometimes referred to hereinafter as the “Glass-Steagall Act provisions”) and the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Investment Company Institute v. Camp, 401 U.S. 617 (1971). The Board's views with respect to some of these questions are set forth below.
(b) It is clear from the legislative history of the Bank Holding Company Act Amendments of 1970 (84 Stat. 1760) that the Glass-Steagall Act provisions were not intended to be affected thereby. Accordingly, the Board regards the Glass-Steagall Act provisions and the Board's prior interpretations thereof as applicable to a holding company's activities as an investment adviser. Consistently with the spirit and purpose of the Glass-Steagall Act, this interpretation applies to all bank holding companies registered under the Bank Holding Company Act irrespective of whether they have subsidiaries that are member banks.
(c) Under § 225.4(a)(5), as amended, bank holding companies (which term, as used herein, includes both their bank and nonbank subsidiaries) may, in accordance with the provisions of § 225.4 (b), act as investment advisers to various types of investment companies, such as “open-end” investment companies (commonly referred to as “mutual funds”) and “closed-end” investment companies. Briefly, a mutual fund is an investment company which, typically, is continuously engaged in the issuance of its shares and stands ready at any time to redeem the securities as to which it is the issuer; a closed-end investment company typically does not issue shares after its initial organization except at infrequent intervals and does not stand ready to redeem its shares.
(d) The Board intends that a bank holding company may exercise all functions that are permitted to be exercised by an “investment adviser” under the Investment Company Act of 1940, except to the extent limited by the Glass-Steagall Act provisions, as described, in part, hereinafter.
(e) The Board recognizes that presently most mutual funds are organized, sponsored and managed by investment advisers with which they are affiliated and that their securities are distributed to the public by such affiliated investment advisers, or subsidiaries or affiliates thereof. However, the Board believes that (1) The Glass-Steagall Act provisions do not permit a bank holding company to perform all such functions, and (2) It is not necessary for a bank holding company to perform all such functions in order to engage effectively in the described activity.
(f) In the Board's opinion, the Glass-Steagall Act provisions, as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, forbid a bank holding company to sponsor, organize, or control a mutual fund. However, the Board does not believe that such restrictions apply to closed-end investment companies as long as such companies are not primarily or frequently engaged in the issuance, sale, and distribution of securities. A bank holding company should not act as investment adviser to an investment company that has a name similar to the name of the holding company or any of its subsidiary banks, unless the prospectus of the investment company contains the disclosures required in paragraph (h) of this section. In no case should a bank holding company act as investment adviser to an investment company that has either the same name as the name of the holding company or any of its subsidiary banks, or a name that contains the word “bank.”
(g) In view of the potential conflicts of interests that may exist, a bank holding company and its bank and nonbank subsidiaries should not purchase in their sole discretion, in a fiduciary capacity (including as managing agent), securities of any investment company for which the bank holding company acts as investment adviser unless, the purchase is specifically authorized by the terms of the instrument creating the fiduciary relationship, by court order, or by the law of the jurisdiction under which the trust is administered.
(h) Under section 20 of the Glass-Steagall Act, a member bank is prohibited from being affiliated with a company that directly, or through a subsidiary, engages principally in the issue, flotation, underwriting, public sale, or distribution of securities. A bank holding company or its nonbank subsidiary may not engage, directly or indirectly, in the underwriting, public sale or distribution of securities of any investment company for which the holding company or any nonbank subsidiary provides investment advice except in compliance with the terms of section 20, and only after obtaining the Board's approval under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act and subject to the limitations and disclosures required by the Board in those cases. The Board has determined, however, that the conduct of securities brokerage activities by a bank holding company or its nonbank subsidiaries, when conducted individually or in combination with investment advisory activities, is not deemed to be the underwriting, public sale, or distribution of securities prohibited by the Glass-Steagall Act, and the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld that determination. See Securities Industry Ass'n v. Board of Governors, 468 U.S. 207 (1984); see also Securities Industry Ass'n v. Board of Governors, 821 F.2d 810 (D.C. Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1005 (1988). Accordingly, the Board believes that a bank holding company or any of its nonbank subsidiaries that has been authorized by the Board under the Bank Holding Company Act to conduct securities brokerage activities (either separately or in combination with investment advisory activities) may act as agent, upon the order and for the account of customers of the holding company or its nonbank subsidiary, to purchase or sell shares of an investment company for which the bank holding company or any of its subsidiaries acts as an investment adviser. In addition, a bank holding company or any of its nonbank subsidiaries that has been authorized by the Board under the Bank Holding Company Act to provide investment advice to third parties generally (either separately or in combination with securities brokerage services) may provide investment advice to customers with respect to the purchase or sale of shares of an investment company for which the holding company or any of its subsidiaries acts as an investment adviser. In the event that a bank holding company or any of its nonbank subsidiaries provides brokerage or investment advisory services (either separately or in combination) to customers in the situations described above, at the time the service is provided the bank holding company should instruct its officers and employees to caution customers to read the prospectus of the investment company before investing and must advise customers in writing that the investment company's shares are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and are not deposits, obligations of, or endorsed or guaranteed in any way by, any bank, unless that happens to be the case. The holding company or nonbank subsidiary must also disclose in writing to the customer the role of the company or affiliate as adviser to the investment company. These disclosures may be made orally so long as written disclosure is provided to the customer immediately thereafter. To the extent that a bank owned by a bank holding company engages in providing advisory or brokerage services to bank customers in connection with an investment company advised by the bank holding company or a nonbank affiliate, but is not required by the bank's primary regulator to make disclosures comparable to the disclosures required to be made by bank holding companies providing such services, the bank holding company should require its subsidiary bank to make the disclosures required in this paragraph to be made by a bank holding company that provides such advisory or brokerage services.
(i) Acting in such capacities as registrar, transfer agent, or custodian for an investment company is not a selling activity and is permitted under § 225.4(a)(4) of Regulation Y. However, in view of potential conflicts of interests, a bank holding company which acts both as custodian and investment adviser for an investment company should exercise care to maintain at a minimal level demand deposit accounts of the investment company which are placed with a bank affiliate and should not invest cash funds of the investment company in time deposit accounts (including certificates of deposit) of any bank affiliate.
§ 225.126   Activities not closely related to banking.
Pursuant to section 4(c)(8) of the Bank Holding Company Act and § 225.4(a) of Regulation Y, the Board of Governors has determined that the following activities are not so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto:
(a) Insurance premium funding—that is, the combined sale of mutual funds and insurance.
(b) Underwriting life insurance that is not sold in connection with a credit transaction by a bank holding company, or a subsidiary thereof.
(c) Real estate brokerage (see 1972 Fed. Res. Bulletin 428).
(d) Land development (see 1972 Fed. Res. Bulletin 429).
(e) Real estate syndication.
(f) Management consulting (see 1972 Fed. Res. Bulletin 571).
(g) Property management (see 1972 Fed. Res. Bulletin 652).
§ 225.127   Investment in corporations or projects designed primarily to promote community welfare.
(a) Under § 225.28(b)(12) of Regulation Y, a bank holding company may, in accordance with the provisions of § 225.23 or § 225.24, engage in “making equity and debt investments in corporations or projects designed primarily to promote community welfare, such as the economic rehabilitation and development of low-income areas.” The Board included that activity among those the Board has determined to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as be a proper incident thereto, in order to permit bank holding companies to fulfill their civic responsibilities. As indicated hereinafter in this interpretation, the Board intends § 225.28(b)(12) to enable bank holding companies to take an active role in the quest for solutions to the Nation's social problems. Although the interpretation primarily focuses on low- and moderate-income housing, it is not intended to limit projects under § 225.28(b)(12) to that area. Other investments primarily designed to promote community welfare are considered permissible, but have not been defined in order to provide bank holding companies flexibility in approaching community problems. For example, bank holding companies may utilize this flexibility to provide new and creative approaches to the promotion of employment opportunities for low-income persons. Bank holding companies possess a unique combination of financial and managerial resources making them particularly suited for a meaningful and substantial role in remedying our social ills. Section 225.28(b)(12) is intended to provide an opportunity for them to assume such a role.
(b) Under the authority of § 225.28(b)(12), a bank holding company may invest in community development corporations established pursuant to Federal or State law. A bank holding company may also participate in other civic projects, such as a municipal parking facility sponsored by a local civic organization as a means to promote greater public use of the community's facilities.
(c) Within the category of permissible investments under § 225.28(b)(12) are investments in projects to construct or rehabilitate multifamily low- or moderate-income housing with respect to which a mortgage is insured under section 221(d)(3), 221(d)(4), or 236 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1701) and investments in projects to construct or rehabilitate low- or moderate-income housing which is financed or assisted by direct loan, tax abatement, or insurance under provisions of State or local law, similar to the aforementioned Federal programs, provided that, with respect to all such projects the owner is, by statute, regulation, or regulatory authority, limited as to the rate of return on his investment in the project, as to rentals or occupancy charges for units in the project, and in such other respects as would be a “limited dividend corporation” (as defined by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development).
(d) Investments in other projects that may be considered to be designed primarily to promote community welfare include but are not limited to: (1) Projects for the construction or rehabilitation of housing for the benefit of persons of low- or moderate-income, (2) projects for the construction or rehabilitation of ancillary local commercial facilities necessary to provide goods or services principally to persons residing in low- or moderate-income housing, and (3) projects designed explicitly to create improved job opportunities for low- or moderate-income groups (for example, minority equity investments, on a temporary basis, in small or medium-sized locally-controlled businesses in low-income urban or other economically depressed areas). In the case of de novo projects, the copy of the notice with respect to such other projects which is to be furnished to Reserve Banks in accordance with the provisions of § 225.23 or § 225.24 should be accompanied by a memorandum which demonstrates that such projects meet the objectives of § 225.28(b)(12).
(e) Investments in corporations or projects organized to build or rehabilitate high-income housing, or commercial, office, or industrial facilities that are not designed explicitly to create improved job opportunities for low-income persons shall be presumed not to be designed primarily to promote community welfare, unless there is substantial evidence to the contrary, even though to some extent the investment may benefit the community.
(f) Section 6 of the Depository Institutions Disaster Relief Act of 1992 permits state member banks (12 U.S.C. 338a) and national banks (12 U.S.C. 24 (Eleventh)) to invest in the stock of community development corporations that are designed primarily to promote the public welfare of low- and moderate-income communities and persons in the areas of housing, services and employment. The Board and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency have adopted rules that permit state member banks and national banks to make certain investments without prior approval. The Board believes that these rules are consistent with the Board's interpretation of, and decisions regarding, the scope of community welfare activities permissible for bank holding companies. Accordingly, approval received by a bank holding company to conduct activities designed to promote the community welfare under section 4(c)(8) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843(c)(8)) and § 225.28(b)(12) of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28(b)(12)) includes approval to engage, either directly or through a subsidiary, in the following activities, up to five percent of the bank holding company's total consolidated capital stock and surplus, without additional Board or Reserve Bank approval:
(1) Invest in and provide financing to a corporation or project or class of corporations or projects that the Board previously has determined is a public welfare project pursuant to paragraph 23 of section 9 of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 338a);
(2) Invest in and provide financing to a corporation or project that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency previously has determined, by order or regulation, is a public welfare investment pursuant to section 5136 of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 24 (Eleventh));
(3) Invest in and provide financing to a community development financial institution pursuant to section 103(5) of the Community Development Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994 (12 U.S.C. 4702(5));
(4) Invest in, provide financing to, develop, rehabilitate, manage, sell, and rent residential property if a majority of the units will be occupied by low- and moderate-income persons or if the property is a “qualified low-income building” as defined in section 42(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 42(c)(2));
(5) Invest in, provide financing to, develop, rehabilitate, manage, sell, and rent nonresidential real property or other assets located in a low- or moderate-income area provided the property is used primarily for low- and moderate-income persons;
(6) Invest in and provide financing to one or more small businesses located in a low- or moderate-income area to stimulate economic development;
(7) Invest in, provide financing to, develop, and otherwise assist job training or placement facilities or programs designed primarily for low- and moderate-income persons;
(8) Invest in and provide financing to an entity located in a low- or moderate-income area if that entity creates long-term employment opportunities, a majority of which (based on full time equivalent positions) will be held by low- and moderate-income persons; and
(9) Provide technical assistance, credit counseling, research, and program development assistance to low- and moderate-income persons, small businesses, or nonprofit corporations to help achieve community development.
(g) For purposes of paragraph (f) of this section, low- and moderate-income persons or areas means individuals and communities whose incomes do not exceed 80 percent of the median income of the area involved, as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Small businesses are businesses that are smaller than the maximum size eligibility standards established by the Small Business Administration (SBA) for the Small Business Investment Company and Development Company Programs or the SBA section 7A loan program; and specifically include those businesses that are majority-owned by members of minority groups or by women.
(h) For purposes of paragraph (f) of this section, five percent of the total consolidated capital stock and surplus of a bank holding company includes its total investment in projects described in paragraph (f) of this section, when aggregated with similar types of investments made by depository institutions controlled by the bank holding company. The term total consolidated capital stock and surplus of the bank holding company means total equity capital and the allowance for loan and lease losses or adjusted allowance for credit losses, as applicable, based on the bank holding company's most recent FR Y-9C (Consolidated Financial Statements for Holding Companies) or FR Y-9SP (Parent Company Only Financial Statements for Small Holding Companies).
§ 225.129   Activities closely related to banking.
Courier activities. The Board's amendment of § 225.4(a), which adds courier services to the list of closely related activities is intended to permit holding companies to transport time critical materials of limited intrinsic value of the types utilized by banks and bank-related firms in performing their business activities. Such transportation activities are of particular importance in the check clearing process of the banking system, but are also important to the performance of other activities, including the processing of financially-related economic data. The authority is not intended to permit holding companies to engage generally in the provision of transportation services.
During the course of the Board's proceedings pertaining to courier services, objections were made that courier activities were not a proper incident to banking because of the possibility that holding companies would or had engaged in unfair competitive practices. The Board believes that adherence to the following principles will eliminate or reduce to an insignificant degree any possibility of unfair competition:
a. A holding company courier subsidiary established under section 4(c)(8) should be a separate, independent corporate entity, not merely a servicing arm of a bank.
b. As such, the subsidiary should exist as a separate, profit-oriented operation and should not be subsidized by the holding company system.
c. Services performed should be explicitly priced, and shall not be paid for indirectly, for example, on the basis of deposits maintained at or loan arrangements with affiliated banks.
1. The courier subsidiary shall perform services on an explicit fee basis and shall be structured as an individual profit center designed to be operated on a profitable basis. The Board may regard operating losses sustained over an extended period as being inconsistent with continued authority to engage in courier activities.
2. Courier services performed on behalf of an affiliate's customer ( such as the carriage of incoming cash letters ) shall be paid for by the customer. Such payments shall not be made indirectly, for example, on the basis of imputed earnings on deposits maintained at or of loan arrangements with subsidiaries of the holding company. Concern has also been expressed that bank-affiliated courier services will be utilized to gain a competitive advantage over firms competing with other holding company affiliates. To reduce the possibility that courier affiliates might be so employed, the Board will impose the following third condition:
3. The courier subsidiary shall, when requested by any bank or any data processing firm providing financially-related data processing services which firm competes with a banking or data processing subsidiary of Applicant, furnish comparable service at comparable rates, unless compliance with such request would be beyond the courier subsidiary's practical capacity. In this regard, the courier subsidiary should make known to the public its minimum rate schedule for services and its general pricing policies thereto. The courier subsidiary is also expected to maintain for a reasonable period of time (not less than two years) each request denied with the reasons for such denial.
§ 225.130   Issuance and sale of short-term debt obligations by bank holding companies.
For text of interpretation, see § 250.221 of this chapter.
§ 225.131   Activities closely related to banking.
(a) Bank management consulting advice. The Board's amendment of § 225.4(a), which adds bank management consulting advice to the list of closely related activities, described in general terms the nature of such activity. This interpretation is intended to explain in greater detail certain of the terms in the amendment.
(b) It is expected that bank management consulting advice would include, but not be limited to, advice concerning: Bank operations, systems and procedures; computer operations and mechanization; implementation of electronic funds transfer systems; site planning and evaluation; bank mergers and the establishment of new branches; operation and management of a trust department; international banking; foreign exchange transactions; purchasing policies and practices; cost analysis, capital adequacy and planning; auditing; accounting procedures; tax planning; investment advice (as authorized in § 225.4(a)(5)); credit policies and administration, including credit documentation, evaluation, and debt collection; product development, including specialized lending provisions; marketing operations, including research, market development and advertising programs; personnel operations, including recruiting, training, evaluation and compensation; and security measures and procedures.
(c) In permitting bank holding companies to provide management consulting advice to nonaffiliated “banks”, the Board intends such advice to be given only to an institution that both accepts deposits that the depositor has a legal right to withdraw on demand and engages in the business of making commercial loans. It is also intended that such management consulting advice may be provided to the “operations subsidiaries” of a bank, since such subsidiaries perform functions that a bank is empowered to perform directly at locations at which the bank is authorized to engage in business (§ 250.141 of this chapter).
(d) Although a bank holding company providing management consulting advice is prohibited by the regulation from owning or controlling, directly or indirectly, any equity securities in a client bank, this limitation does not apply to shares of a client bank acquired, directly or indirectly, as a result of a default on a debt previously contracted. This limitation is also inapplicable to shares of a client bank acquired by a bank holding company, directly or indirectly, in a fiduciary capacity: Provided, That the bank holding company or its subsidiary does not have sole discretionary authority to vote such shares or shares held with sole voting rights constitute not more than five percent of the outstanding voting shares of a client bank.
§ 225.132   Acquisition of assets.
(a) From time to time questions have arisen as to whether and under what circumstances a bank holding company engaged in nonbank activities, directly or indirectly through a subsidiary, pursuant to section 4(c)(8) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1843(c)(3)), may acquire the assets and employees of another company, without first obtaining Board approval pursuant to section 4(c) (8) and the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.4(b)).
(b) In determining whether Board approval is required in connection with the acquisition of assets, it is necessary to determine (a) whether the acquisition is made in the ordinary course of business 1 or (b) whether it constitutes the acquisition, in whole or in part, of a going concern. 2
1 Section 225.4(c)(3) of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.4(c)(3)) generally prohibits a bank holding company or its subsidiary engaged in activities pursuant to authority of section 4(c)(8) of the Act from being a party to any merger “or acquisition of assets other than in the ordinary course of business” without prior Board approval.
2 In accordance with the provisions of section 4(c)(8) of the Act and § 225.4(b) of Regulation Y, the acquisition of a going concern requires prior Board approval.
(c) The following examples illustrate transactions where prior Board approval will generally be required:
(1) The transaction involves the acquisition of all or substantially all of the assets of a company, or a subsidiary, division, department or office thereof.
(2) The transaction involves the acquisition of less than “substantially all” of the assets of a company, or a subsidiary, division, department or office thereof, the operations of which are being terminated or substantially discontinued by the seller, but such asset acquisition is significant in relation to the size of the same line of nonbank activity of the holding company (e.g., consumer finance mortgage banking, data processing). For purposes of this interpretation, an acquisition would generally be presumed to be significant if the book value of the nonbank assets being acquired exceeds 50 percent of the book value of the nonbank assets of the holding company or nonbank subsidiary comprising the same line of activity.
(3) The transaction involves the acquisition of assets for resale and the sale of such assets is not a normal business activity of the acquiring holding company.
(4) The transaction involves the acquisition of the assets of a company, or a subsidiary, division, department or office thereof, and a major purpose of the transaction is to hire some of the seller's principal employees who are expert, skilled and experienced in the business of the company being acquired.
(d) In some cases it may be difficult, due to the wide variety of circumstances involving possible acquisition of assets, to determine whether such acquisitions require prior Board approval. Bank holding companies are encouraged to contact their local Reserve Bank for guidance where doubt exists as to whether such an acquisition is in the ordinary course of business or an acquisition, in whole or in part, of a going concern.
§ 225.133   Computation of amount invested in foreign corporations under general consent procedures.
For text of this interpretation, see § 211.111 of this subchapter.
§ 225.134   Escrow arrangements involving bank stock resulting in a violation of the Bank Holding Company Act.
(a) In connection with a recent application to become a bank holding company, the Board considered a situation in which shares of a bank were acquired and then placed in escrow by the applicant prior to the Board's approval of the application. The facts indicated that the applicant company had incurred debt for the purpose of acquiring bank shares and immediately after the purchase the shares were transferred to an unaffiliated escrow agent with instructions to retain possession of the shares pending Board action on the company's application to become a bank holding company. The escrow agreement provided that, if the application were approved by the Board, the escrow agent was to return the shares to the applicant company; and, if the application were denied, the escrow agent was to deliver the shares to the applicant company's shareholders upon their assumption of debt originally incurred by the applicant in the acquisition of the bank shares. In addition, the escrow agreement provided that, while the shares were held in escrow, the applicant could not exercise voting or any other ownership rights with respect to those shares.
(b) On the basis of the above facts, the Board concluded that the company had violated the prior approval provisions of section 3 of the Bank Holding Company Act (“Act”) at the time that it made the initial acquisition of bank shares and that, for purposes of the Act, the company continued to control those shares in violation of the Act. In view of these findings, individuals and bank holding companies should not enter into escrow arrangements of the type described herein, or any similar arrangement, without securing the prior approval of the Board, since such action could constitute a violation of the Act.
(c) While the above represents the Board's conclusion with respect to the particular escrow arrangement involved in the proposal presented, the Board does not believe that the use of an escrow arrangement would always result in a violation of the Act. For example, it appears that a transaction whereby bank shares are placed in escrow pending Board action on an application would not involve a violation of the Act so long as title to such shares remains with the seller during the pendency of the application; there are no other indicia that the applicant controls the shares held in escrow; and, in the event of a Board denial of the application, the escrow agreement provides that the shares would be returned to the seller.
§ 225.136   Utilization of foreign subsidiaries to sell long-term debt obligations in foreign markets and to transfer the proceeds to their United States parent(s) for domestic purposes.
For text of this interpretation, see § 211.112 of this subchapter.
§ 225.137   Acquisitions of shares pursuant to section 4(c)(6) of the Bank Holding Company Act.
(a) The Board has received a request for an interpretation of section 4(c)(6) of the Bank Holding Company Act (“Act”) 1 in connection with a proposal under which a number of bank holding companies would purchase interests in an insurance company to be formed for the purpose of underwriting or reinsuring credit life and credit accident and health insurance sold in connection with extensions of credit by the stockholder bank holding companies and their affiliates.
1 It should be noted that every Board Order granting approval under section 4(c)(8) of the Act contains the following paragraph:
“This determination is subject . . . to the Board's authority to require such modification or termination of the activities of a holding company or any of its subsidiaries as the Board finds necessary to assure compliance with the provisions and purposes of the Act and the Board's regulations and orders issued thereunder, or to prevent evasion thereof.”
The Board believes that, even apart from this Interpretation, this language preserves the authority of the Board to require the revisions contemplated in this Interpretation.
(b) Each participating holding company would own no more than 5 percent of the outstanding voting shares of the company. However, the investment of each holding company would be represented by a separate class of voting security, so that each stockholder would own 100 percent of its respective class. The participating companies would execute a formal “Agreement Among Stockholders” under which each would agree to use its best efforts at all times to direct or recommend to customers and clients the placement of their life, accident and health insurance directly or indirectly with the company. Such credit-related insurance placed with the company would be identified in the records of the company as having been originated by the respective stockholder. A separate capital account would be maintained for each stockholder consisting of the original capital contribution increased or decreased from time to time by the net profit or loss resulting from the insurance business attributable to each stockholder. Thus, each stockholder would receive a return on its investment based upon the claims experience and profitability of the insurance business that it had itself generated. Dividends declared by the board of directors of the company would be payable to each stockholder only out of the earned surplus reflected in the respective stockholder's capital account.
(c) It has been requested that the Board issue an interpretation that section 4(c)(6) of the Act provides an exemption under which participating bank holding companies may acquire such interests in the company without prior approval of the Board.
(d) On the basis of a careful review of the documents submitted, in light of the purposes and provisions of the Act, the Board has concluded that section 4(c)(6) of the Act is inapplicable to this proposal and that a bank holding company must obtain the approval of the Board before participating in such a proposal in the manner described. The Board's conclusion is based upon the following considerations:
(1) Section 2(a)(2)(A) of the Act provides that a company is deemed to have control over a second company if it owns or controls “25 per centum or more of any class of voting securities” of the second company. In the case presented, the stock interest of each participant would be evidenced by a different class of stock and each would accordingly, own 100 percent of a class of voting securities of the company. Thus, each of the stockholders would be deemed to “control” the company and prior Board approval would be required for each stockholder's acquisition of stock in the company.
(2) The Board believes that section 4(c)(6) should properly be interpreted as creating an exemption from the general prohibitions in section 4 on ownership of stock in nonbank companies only for passive investments amounting to not more than 5 percent of a company's outstanding stock, and that the exemption was not intended to allow a group of holding companies, through concerted action, to engage in an activity as entrepreneurs. Section 4 of the Act, of course, prohibits not only owning stock in nonbank companies, but engaging in activities other than banking or those activities permitted by the Board under section 4(c)(8) as being closely related to banking. Thus, if a holding company may be deemed to be engaging in an activity through the medium of a company in which it owns less than 5 percent of the voting stock it may nevertheless require Board approval, despite the section 4(c)(6) exemption.
(e) To accept the argument that section 4(c)(6) is an unqualified grant of permission to a bank holding company to own 5 percent of the shares of any nonbanking company irrespective of the nature or extent of the holding company's participation in the affairs of the nonbanking company would, in the Board's view, create the potential for serious and widespread evasion of the Act's controls over nonbanking activities. Such a construction would allow a group of 20 bank holding companies—or even a single bank holding company and one or more nonbank companies—to engage in entrepreneurial joint ventures in businesses prohibited to bank holding companies, a result the Board believes to be contrary to the intent of Congress.
(f) In this proposal, each of the participating stockholders must be viewed as engaging in the business of insurance underwriting. Each stockholder would agree to channel to the company the insurance business it generates, and the value of the interest of each stockholder would be determined by reference to the profitability of the business generated by that stockholder itself. There is no sharing or pooling among stockholders of underwriting risks assumed by the company, and profit or loss from investments is allocated on the basis of each bank holding company's allocable underwriting profit or loss. The interest of each stockholder is thus clearly that of an entrepreneur rather than that of an investor.
(g) Accordingly, on the basis of the factual situation before the Board, and for the reasons summarized above, the Board has concluded that section 4(c)(6) of the Act cannot be interpreted to exempt the ownership of 5 percent of the voting stock of a company under the circumstances described, and that a bank holding company wishing to become a stockholder in a company under this proposal would be required to obtain the Board's approval to do so.
§ 225.138   Statement of policy concerning divestitures by bank holding companies.
(a) From time to time the Board of Governors receives requests from companies subject to the Bank Holding Company Act, or other laws administered by the Board, to extend time periods specified either by statute or by Board order for the divestiture of assets held or activities engaged in by such companies. Such divestiture requirements may arise in a number of ways. For example, divestiture may be ordered by the Board in connection with an acquisition found to have been made in violation of law. In other cases the divestiture may be pursuant to a statutory requirement imposed at the time and amendment to the Act was adopted, or it may be required as a result of a foreclosure upon collateral held by the company or a bank subsidiary in connection with a debt previously contracted in good faith. Certain divestiture periods may be extended in the discretion of the Board, but in other cases the Board may be without statutory authority, or may have only limited authority, to extend a specified divestiture period.
(b) In the past, divestitures have taken many different forms, and the Board has followed a variety of procedures in enforcing divestiture requirements. Because divestitures may occur under widely disparate factual circumstances, and because such forced dispositions may have the potential for causing a serious adverse economic impact upon the divesting company, the Board believes it is important to maintain a large measure of flexibility in dealing with divestitures. For these reasons, there can be no fixed rule as to the type of divestiture that will be appropriate in all situations. For example, where divestiture has been ordered to terminate a control relationship created or maintained in violation of the Act, it may be necessary to impose conditions that will assure that the unlawful relationship has been fully terminated and that it will not arise in the future. In other circumstances, however, less stringent conditions may be appropriate.
(1) Avoidance of delays in divestitures. Where a specific time period has been fixed for accomplishing divestiture, the affected company should endeavor and should be encouraged to complete the divestiture as early as possible during the specific period. There will generally be substantial advantages to divesting companies in taking steps to plan for and accomplish divestitures well before the end of the divestiture period. For example, delays may impair the ability of the company to realize full value for the divested assets, for as the end of the divestiture period approaches the “forced sale” aspect of the divestiture may lead potential buyers to withhold firm offers and to bargain for lower prices. In addition, because some prospective purchasers may themselves require regulatory approval to acquire the divested property, delay by the divesting company may—by leaving insufficient time to obtain such approvals—have the effect of narrowing the range of prospective purchases. Thus, delay in planning for divestiture may increase the likelihood that the company will seek an extension of the time for divestiture if difficulty is encountered in securing a purchaser, and in certain situations, of course, the Board may be without statutory authority to grant extensions.
(2) Submissions and approval of divestiture plans. When a divestiture requirement is imposed, the company affected should generally be asked to submit a divestiture plan promptly for review and approval by the Reserve Bank or the Board. Such a requirement may be imposed pursuant to the Board's authority under section 5(b) of the Bank Holding Company Act to issue such orders as may be necessary to enable the Board to administer and carry out the purposes of the Act and prevent evasions thereof. A divestiture plan should be as specific as possible, and should indicate the manner in which divestiture will be accomplished—for example, by a bulk sale of the assets to a third party, by “spinoff” or distribution of shares to the shareholders of the divesting company, or by termination of prohibited activities. In addition, the plan should specify the steps the company expects to take in effecting the divestiture and assuring its completeness, and should indicate the time schedule for taking such steps. In appropriate circumstances, the divestiture plan should make provision for assuring that “controlling influence” relationships, such as management or financial interlocks, will not continue to exist.
(3) Periodic progress reports. A company subject to a divestiture requirement should generally be required to submit regular periodic reports detailing the steps it has taken to effect divestiture. Such a requirement may be imposed pursuant to the Board's authority under section 5(b) of the Bank Holding Company Act, referred to above, as well as its authority under section 5(c) of the Act to require reports for the purpose of keeping the Board informed as to whether the Act and Board regulations and order thereunder are being complied with. Reports should set forth in detail such matters as the identities of potential buyers who have been approached by the company, the dates of discussions with potential buyers and the identities of the individuals involved in such discussions, the terms of any offers received, and the reasons for rejecting any offers. In addition, the reports should indicate whether the company has employed brokers, investment bankers or others to assist in the divestiture, or its reasons for not doing so, and should describe other efforts by the company to seek out possible purchasers. The purpose of requiring such reports is to insure that substantial and good faith efforts being made by the company to satisfy its divestiture obligations. The frequency of such reports may vary depending upon the nature of the divestiture and the period specified for divestiture. However, such reports should generally not be required less frequently than every three months, and may in appropriate cases be required on a monthly or even more frequent basis. Progress reports as well as divestiture plans should be afforded confidential treatment.
(4) Extensions of divestiture periods. Certain divestiture periods—such as December 31, 1980 deadline for divestitures required by the 1970 Amendments to the Bank Holding Company Act—are not extendable. In such cases it is imperative that divestiture be accomplished in a timely manner. In certain other cases, the Board may have discretion to extend a statutorily prescribed divestiture period within specified limits. For example, under section 4(c)(2) of the Act the Board may extend for three one-year periods the two-year period in which a bank subsidiary of a holding company is otherwise required to divest shares acquired in satisfaction of a debt previously contracted in good faith. In such cases, however, when the permissible extensions expire the Board no longer has discretion to grant further extensions. In still other cases, where a divestiture period is prescribed by the Board, in the exercise of its regulatory judgment, the Board may have broader discretion to grant extensions. Where extensions of specified divestiture periods are permitted by law, extensions should not be granted except under compelling circumstances. Neither unfavorable market conditions, nor the possibility that the company may incur some loss, should alone be viewed as constituting such circumstances—particularly if the company has failed to take earlier steps to accomplish a divestiture under more favorable circumstances. Normally, a request for an extension will not be considered unless the company has established that it has made substantial and continued good faith efforts to accomplish the divestiture within the prescribed period. Furthermore, requests for extensions of divestiture periods must be made sufficiently in advance of the expiration of the prescribed period both to enable the Board to consider the request in an orderly manner and to enable the company to effect a timely divestiture in the event the request for extension is denied. Companies subject to divestiture requirements should be aware that a failure to accomplish a divestiture within the prescribed period may in and of itself be viewed as a separate violation of the Act.
(5) Use of trustees. In appropriate cases a company subject to a divestiture requirement may be required to place the assets subject to divestiture with an independent trustee under instructions to accomplish a sale by a specified date, by public auction if necessary. Such a trustee may be given the responsibility for exercising the voting rights with respect to shares being divested. The use of such a trustee may be particularly appropriate where the divestiture is intended to terminate a control relationship established or maintained in violation of law, or where the divesting company has demonstrated an inability or unwillingness to take timely steps to effect a divestiture.
(6) Presumptions of control. Bank holding companies contemplating a divestiture should be mindful of section 2(g)(3) of the Bank Holding Company Act, which creates a presumption of continued control over the transferred assets where the transferee is indebted to the transferor, or where certain interlocks exist, as well as § 225.2 of Regulation Y, which sets forth certain additional control presumptions. Where one of these presumptions has arisen with respect to divested assets, the divestiture will not be considered as complete until the presumption has been overcome. It should be understood that the inquiry into the termination of control relationships is not limited by the statutory and regulatory presumptions of control, and that the Board may conclude that a control relationship still exists even though the presumptions do not apply.
(7) Role of the Reserve Banks. The Reserve Banks have a responsibility for supervising and enforcing divestitures. Specifically, in coordination with Board staff they should review divestiture plans to assure that proposed divestitures will result in the termination of control relationships and will not create unsafe or unsound conditions in any bank or bank holding company; they should monitor periodic progress reports to assure that timely steps are being taken to effect divestitures; and they should prompt companies to take such steps when it appears that progress is not being made. Where Reserve Banks have delegated authority to extend divestiture periods, that authority should be exercised consistently with this policy statement.
§ 225.139   Presumption of continued control under section 2(g)(3) of the Bank Holding Company Act.
(a) Section 2(g)(3) of the Bank Holding Company Act (the “Act”) establishes a statutory presumption that where certain specified relationships exist between a transferor and transferee of shares, the transferor (if it is a bank holding company, or a company that would be such but for the transfer) continues to own or control indirectly the transferred shares. 1 This presumption arises by operation of law, as of the date of the transfer, without the need for any order or determination by the Board. Operation of the presumption may be terminated only by the issuance of a Board determination, after opportunity for hearing, “that the transferor is not in fact capable of controlling the transferee.” 2
1 The presumption arises where the transferee “is indebted to the transferor, or has one or more officers, directors, trustees, or beneficiaries in common with or subject to control by the transferor.”
2 The Board has delegated to its General Counsel the authority to issue such determinations, 12 CFR 265.2(b)(1).
(b) The purpose of section 2(g)(3) is to provide the Board an opportunity to assess the effectiveness of divestitures in certain situations in which there may be a risk that the divestiture will not result in the complete termination of a control relationship. By presuming control to continue as a matter of law, section 2(g)(3) operates to allow the effectiveness of the divestiture to be assessed before the divesting company is permitted to act on the assumption that the divestiture is complete. Thus, for example, if a holding company divests its banking interest under circumstances where the presumption of continued control arises, the divesting company must continue to consider itself bound by the Act until an appropriate order is entered by the Board dispelling the presumption. Section 2(g)(3) does not establish a substantive rule that invalidates transfers to which it applies, and in a great many cases the Board has acted favorably on applications to have the presumption dispelled. It merely provides a procedural opportunity for Board consideration of the effect of such transfers in advance of their being deemed effective. Whether or not the statutory presumption arises, the substantive test for assessing the effectiveness of a divestiture is the same—that is, the Board must be assured that all control relationships between the transferor and the transferred property have been terminated and will not be reestablished. 3
3 It should be noted, however, that the Board will require termination of any interlocking management relationships between the divesting company and the transferee or the divested company as a precondition of finding that a divestiture is complete. Similarly, the retention of an economic interest in the divested company that would create an incentive for the divesting company to attempt to influence the management of the divested company will preclude a finding that the divestiture is complete. (See the Board's Order in the matter of “International Bank”, 1977 Federal Reserve Bulletin 1106, 1113.)
(c) In the course of administering section 2(g)(3) the Board has had several occasions to consider the scope of that section. In addition, questions have been raised by and with the Board's staff as to coverage of the section. Accordingly, the Board believes it would be useful to set forth the following interpretations of section 2(g)(3):
(1) The terms transferor and transferee, as used in section 2(g)(3), include parents and subsidiaries of each. Thus, for example, where a transferee is indebted to a subsidiary of the transferor, or where a specified interlocking relationship exists between the transferor or transferee and a subsidiary of the other (or between subsidiaries of each), the presumption arises. Similarly, if a parent of the transferee is indebted to a parent of the transferor, the presumption arises. The presumption of continued control also arises where an interlock or debt relationship is retained between the divesting company and the company being divested, since the divested company will be or may be viewed as a subsidiary of the transferee or group of transferees.
(2) The terms officers, directors, and trustees, as used in section 2(g)(3), include persons performing functions normally associated with such positions (including general partners in a partnership and limited partners having a right to participate in the management of the affairs of the partnership) as well as persons holding such positions in an advisory or honorary capacity. The presumption arises not only where the transferee or transferred company has an officer, director or trustee in common with the transferor, but where the transferee himself holds such a position with the transferor. 4 It should be noted that where a transfer takes the form of a pro-rata distribution, or spin-off, of shares to a company's shareholders, officers and directors of the transferor company are likely to receive a portion of such shares. The presumption of continued control would, of course, attach to any shares transferred to officers and directors of the divesting company, whether by spinoff or outright sale. However, the presumption will be of legal significance—and will thus require an application under section 2(g)(3)—only where the total number of shares subject to the presumption exceeds one of the applicable thresholds in the Act. For example, where officers and directors of a one-bank holding company receive in the aggregate 25 percent or more of the stock of a bank subsidiary being divested by the holding company, the holding company would be presumed to continue to control the divested bank. In such a case it would be necessary for the divesting company to demonstrate that it no longer controls either the divested bank or the officer/director transferees. However, if officers and directors were to receive in the aggregate less than 25 percent of the bank's stock (and no other shares were subject to the presumption), section 2(g)(3) would not have the legal effect of presuming continued control of the bank. 5 In the case of a divestiture of nonbank shares, an application under section 2(g)(3) would be required whenever officers and directors of the divesting company received in the aggregate more than 5 percent of the shares of the company being divested.
4 It has been suggested that the words in common with in section 2(g)(3) evidence an intent to make the presumption applicable only where the transferee is a company having an interlock with the transferor. Such an interpretation would, in the Board's view, create an unwarranted gap in the coverage of section 2(g)(3). Furthermore, because the presumption clearly arises where the transferee is an individual who is indebted to the transferor such an interpretation would result in an illogical internal inconsistency in the statute.
5 Of course, the fact that section 2(g)(3) would not operate to presume continued control would not necessarily mean that control had in fact been terminated if control could be exercised through other means.
(3) Although section 2(g)(3) refers to transfers of shares it is not, in the Board's view, limited to disposition of corporate stock. General or limited partnership interests, for example, are included within the term shares. Furthermore, the transfer of all or substantially all of the assets of a company, or the transfer of such a significant volume of assets that the transfer may in effect constitute the disposition of a separate activity of the company, is deemed by the Board to involve a transfer of shares of that company.
(4) The term indebtedness giving rise to the presumption of continued control under section 2(g)(3) of the Act is not limited to debt incurred in connection with the transfer; it includes any debt outstanding at the time of transfer from the transferee to the transferor or its subsidiaries. However, the Board believes that not every kind of indebtedness was within the contemplation of the Congress when section 2(g)(3) was adopted. Routine business credit of limited amounts and loans for personal or household purposes are generally not the kinds of indebtedness that, standing alone, support a presumption that the creditor is able to control the debtor. Accordingly, the Board does not regard the presumption of section 2(g)(3) as applicable to the following categories of credit, provided the extensions of credit are not secured by the transferred property and are made in the ordinary course of business of the transferor (or its subsidiary) that is regularly engaged in the business of extending credit:
(i) Consumer credit extended for personal or household use to an individual transferee; (ii) student loans made for the education of the individual transferee or a spouse or child of the transferee; (iii) a home mortgage loan made to an individual transferee for the purchase of a residence for the individual's personal use and secured by the residence; and (iv) loans made to companies (as defined in section 2(b) of the Act) in an aggregate amount not exceeding ten per cent of the total purchase price (or if not sold, the fair market value) of the transferred property. The amounts and terms of the preceding categories of credit should not differ substantially from similar credit extended in comparable circumstances to others who are not transferees. It should be understood that, while the statutory presumption in situations involving these categories of credit may not apply, the Board is not precluded in any case from examining the facts of a particular transfer and finding that the divestiture of control was ineffective based on the facts of record.
(d) Section 2(g)(3) provides that a Board determination that a transferor is not in fact capable of controlling a transferee shall be made after opportunity for hearing. It has been the Board's routine practice since 1966 to publish notice in the Federal Register of applications filed under section 2(g)(3) and to offer interested parties an opportunity for a hearing. Virtually without exception no comments have been submitted on such applications by parties other than the applicant and, with the exception of one case in which the request was later withdrawn, no hearings have been requested in such cases. Because the Board believes that the hearing provision in section 2(g)(3) was intended as a protection for applicants who are seeking to have the presumption overcome by a Board order, a hearing would not be of use where an application is to be granted. In light of the experience indicating that the publication of Federal Register notice of such applications has not served a useful purpose, the Board has decided to alter its procedures in such cases. In the future, Federal Register notice of section 2(g)(3) applications will be published only in cases in which the Board's General Counsel, acting under delegated authority, has determined not to grant such an application and has referred the matter to the Board for decision. 6
6 It should be noted that in the event a third party should take exception to a Board order under section 2(g)(3) finding that control has been terminated, any rights such party might have would not be prejudiced by the order. If such party brought facts to the Board's attention indicating that control had not been terminated the Board would have ample authority to revoke its order and take necessary remedial action.
Orders issued under section 2(g)(3) are published in the Federal Reserve “Bulletin.”
§ 225.140   Disposition of property acquired in satisfaction of debts previously contracted.
(a) The Board recently considered the permissibility, under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act, of a subsidiary of a bank holding company acquiring and holding assets acquired in satisfaction of a debt previously contracted in good faith (a “dpc” acquisition). In the situation presented, a lending subsidiary of a bank holding company made a “dpc” acquisition of assets and transferred them to a wholly-owned subsidiary of the bank holding company for the purpose of effecting an orderly divestiture. The question presented was whether such “dpc” assets could be held indefinitely by a bank holding company subsidiary as incidental to its permissible lending activity.
(b) While the Board believes that “dpc” acquisitions may be regarded as normal, necessary and incidental to the business of lending, the Board does not believe that the holding of assets acquired “dpc” without any time restrictions is appropriate from the standpoint of prudent banking and in light of the prohibitions in section 4 of the Act against engaging in nonbank activities. If a nonbanking subsidiary of a bank holding company were permitted, either directly or through a subsidiary, to hold “dpc” assets of substantial amount over an extended period of time, the holding of such property could result in an unsafe or unsound banking practice or in the holding company engaging in an impermissible activity in connection with the assets, rather than liquidating them.
(c) The Board notes that section 4(c)(2) of the Bank Holding Company Act provides an exemption from the prohibitions of section 4 of the Act for bank holding company subsidiaries to acquire shares “dpc”. It also provides that such “dpc” shares may be held for a period of two years, subject to the Board's authority to grant three one-year extensions up to a maximum of five years. 1 Viewed in light of the Congressional policy evidenced by section 4(c)(2), the Board believes that a lending subsidiary of a bank holding company or the holding company itself, should be permitted, as an incident to permissible lending activities, to make acquisitions of “dpc” assets. Consistent with the principles underlying the provisions of section 4(c)(2) of the Act and as a matter of prudent banking practice, such assets may be held for no longer than five years from the date of acquisition. Within the divestiture period it is expected that the company will make good faith efforts to dispose of “dpc” shares or assets at the earliest practicable date. While no specific authorization is necessary to hold such assets for the five-year period, after two years from the date of acquisition of such assets, the holding company should report annually on its efforts to accomplish divestiture to its Reserve Bank. The Reserve Bank will monitor the efforts of the company to effect an orderly divestiture, and may order divestiture before the end of the five-year period if supervisory concerns warrant such action.
1 The Board notes that where the dpc shares or other similar interests represent less than 5 percent of the total of such interests outstanding, they may be retained on the basis of section 4(c)(6), even if originally acquired dpc.
(d) The Board recognizes that there are instances where a company may encounter particular difficulty in attempting to effect an orderly divestiture of “dpc” real estate holdings within the divestiture period, notwithstanding its persistent good faith efforts to dispose of such property. In the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980, (Pub. L. 96-221) Congress, recognizing that real estate possesses unusual characteristics, amended the National Banking Act to permit national banks to hold real estate for five years and for an additional five-year period subject to certain conditions. Consistent with the policy underlying the recent Congressional enactment, and as a matter of supervisory policy, a bank holding company may be permitted to hold real estate acquired “dpc” beyond the initial five-year period provided that the value of the real estate on the books of the company has been written down to fair market value, the carrying costs are not significant in relation to the overall financial position of the company, and the company has made good faith efforts to effect divestiture. Companies holding real estate for this extended period are expected to make active efforts to dispose of it, and should keep the Reserve Bank advised on a regular basis concerning their ongoing efforts. Fair market value should be derived from appraisals, comparable sales or some other reasonable method. In any case, “dpc” real estate would not be permitted to be held beyond 10 years from the date of its acquisition.
(e) With respect to the transfer by a subsidiary of other “dpc” shares or assets to another company in the holding company system, including a section 4(c)(1)(D) liquidating subsidiary, or to the holding company itself, such transfers would not alter the original divestiture period applicable to such shares or assets at the time of their acquisition. Moreover, to ensure that assets are not carried at inflated values for extended periods of time, the Board expects, in the case of all such intracompany transfers, that the shares or assets will be transferred at a value no greater than the fair market value at the time of transfer and that the transfer will be made in a normal arms-length transaction.
(f) With regard to “dpc” assets acquired by a banking subsidiary of a holding company, so long as the assets continue to be held by the bank itself, the Board will regard them as being solely within the regulatory authority of the primary supervisor of the bank.
§ 225.141   Operations subsidiaries of a bank holding company.
In orders approving the retention by a bank holding company of a 4(c)(8) subsidiary, the Board has stated that it would permit, without any specific regulatory approval, the formation of a wholly owned subsidiary of an approved 4(c)(8) company to engage in activities that such a company could itself engage in directly through a division or department. ( Northwestern Financial Corporation, 65 Federal Reserve Bulletin 566 (1979).) Section 4(a)(2) of the Act provides generally that a bank holding company may engage directly in the business of managing and controlling banks and permissible nonbank activities, and in furnishing services directly to its subsidiaries. Even though section 4 of the Act generally prohibits the acquisition of shares of nonbanking organizations, the Board does not believe that such prohibition should apply to the formation by a holding company of a wholly-owned subsidiary to engage in activities that it could engage in directly. Accordingly, as a general matter, the Board will permit without any regulatory approval a bank holding company to form a wholly-owned subsidiary to perform servicing activities for subsidiaries that the holding company itself could perform directly or through a department or a division under section 4(a)(2) of the Act. The Board believes that permitting this type of subsidiary is not inconsistent with the nonbanking prohibitions of section 4 of the Act, and is consistent with the authority in section 4(c)(1)(C) of the Act, which permits a bank holding company, without regulatory approval, to form a subsidiary to perform services for its banking subsidiaries. The Board notes, however, that a servicing subsidiary established by a bank holding company in reliance on this interpretation will be an affiliate of the subsidiary bank of the holding company for the purposes of the lending restrictions of section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act. (12 U.S.C. 371c)
§ 225.142   Statement of policy concerning bank holding companies engaging in futures, forward and options contracts on U.S. Government and agency securities and money market instruments.
(a) Purpose of financial contract positions. In supervising the activities of bank holding companies, the Board has adopted and continues to follow the principle that bank holding companies should serve as a source of strength for their subsidiary banks. Accordingly, the Board believes that any positions that bank holding companies or their nonbank subsidiaries take in financial contracts should reduce risk exposure, that is, not be speculative.
(b) Establishment of prudent written policies, appropriate limitations and internal controls and audit programs. If the parent organization or nonbank subsidiary is taking or intends to take positions in financial contracts, that company's board of directors should approve prudent written policies and establish appropriate limitations to insure that financial contract activities are performed in a safe and sound manner with levels of activity reasonably related to the organization's business needs and capacity to fulfill obligations. In addition, internal controls and internal audit programs to monitor such activity should be established. The board of directors, a duly authorized committee thereof or the internal auditors should review periodically (at least monthly) all financial contract positions to insure conformity with such policies and limits. In order to determine the company's exposure, all open positions should be reviewed and market values determined at least monthly, or more often, depending on volume and magnitude of positions.
(c) Formulating policies and recording financial contracts. In formulating its policies and procedures, the parent holding company may consider the interest rate exposure of its nonbank subsidiaries, but not that of its bank subsidiaries. As a matter of policy, the Board believes that any financial contracts executed to reduce the interest rate exposure of a bank affiliate of a holding company should be reflected on the books and records of the bank affiliate (to the extent required by the bank policy statements), rather than on the books and records of the parent company. If a bank has an interest rate exposure that management believes requires hedging with financial contracts, the bank should be the direct beneficiary of any effort to reduce that exposure. The Board also believes that final responsibility for financial contract transactions for the account of each affiliated bank should reside with the management of that bank.
(d) Accounting. The joint bank policy statements of March 12, 1980 include accounting guidelines for banks that engage in financial contract activities. Since the Financial Accounting Standards Board is presently considering accounting standards for contract activities, no specific accounting requirements for financial contracts entered into by parent bank holding companies and nonbank subsidiaries are being mandated at this time. The Board expects to review further developments in this area.
(e) Board to monitor bank holding company transactions in financial contracts. The Board intends to monitor closely bank holding company transactions in financial contracts to ensure that any such activity is consistent with maintaining a safe and sound banking system. In any cases where bank holding companies are found to be engaging in speculative practices, the Board is prepared to institute appropriate action under the Financial Institutions Supervisory Act of 1966, as amended.
(f) Federal Reserve Bank notification. Bank holding companies should furnish written notification to their District Federal Reserve Bank within 10 days after financial contract activities are begun by the parent or a nonbank subsidiary. Holding companies in which the parent or a nonbank subsidiary currently engage in financial contract activity should furnish notice by March 31, 1983.
§ 225.143   Policy statement on nonvoting equity investments by bank holding companies.
(a) Introduction. (1) In recent months, a number of bank holding companies have made substantial equity investments in a bank or bank holding company (the “acquiree”) located in states other than the home state of the investing company through acquisition of preferred stock or nonvoting common shares of the acquiree. Because of the evident interest in these types of investments and because they raise substantial questions under the Bank Holding Company Act (the “Act”), the Board believes it is appropriate to provide guidance regarding the consistency of such arrangements with the Act.
(2) This statement sets out the Board's concerns with these investments, the considerations the Board will take into account in determining whether the investments are consistent with the Act, and the general scope of arrangements to be avoided by bank holding companies. The Board recognizes that the complexity of legitimate business arrangements precludes rigid rules designed to cover all situations and that decisions regarding the existence or absence of control in any particular case must take into account the effect of the combination of provisions and covenants in the agreement as a whole and the particular facts and circumstances of each case. Nevertheless, the Board believes that the factors outlined in this statement provide a framework for guiding bank holding companies in complying with the requirements of the Act.
(b) Statutory and regulatory provisions. (1) Under section 3(a) of the Act, a bank holding company may not acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5 per cent of the voting shares of a bank without the Board's prior approval. (12 U.S.C. 1842(a)(3)). In addition, this section of the Act provides that a bank holding company may not, without the Board's prior approval, acquire control of a bank: That is, in the words of the statute, “for any action to be taken that causes a bank to become a subsidiary of a bank holding company.” (12 U.S.C. 1842(a)(2)). Under the Act, a bank is a subsidiary of a bank holding company if:
(i) The company directly or indirectly owns, controls, or holds with power to vote 25 per cent or more of the voting shares of the bank;
(ii) The company controls in any manner the election of a majority of the board of directors of the bank; or
(iii) The Board determines, after notice and opportunity for hearing, that the company has the power, directly or indirectly, to exercise a controlling influence over the management or policies of the bank. (12 U.S.C. 1841(d)).
(2) In intrastate situations, the Board may approve bank holding company acquisitions of additional banking subsidiaries. However, where the acquiree is located outside the home state of the investing bank holding company, section 3(d) of the Act prevents the Board from approving any application that will permit a bank holding company to “acquire, directly or indirectly, any voting shares of, interest in, or all or substantially all of the assets of any additional bank.” (12 U.S.C. 1842(d)(1)).
(c) Review of agreements. (1) In apparent expectation of statutory changes that might make interstate banking permissible, bank holding companies have sought to make substantial equity investments in other bank holding companies across state lines, but without obtaining more than 5 per cent of the voting shares or control of the acquiree. These investments involve a combination of the following arrangements:
(i) Options on, warrants for, or rights to convert nonvoting shares into substantial blocks of voting securities of the acquiree bank holding company or its subsidiary bank(s);
(ii) Merger or asset acquisition agreements with the out-of-state bank or bank holding company that are to be consummated in the event interstate banking is permitted;
(iii) Provisions that limit or restrict major policies, operations or decisions of the acquiree; and
(iv) Provisions that make acquisition of the acquiree or its subsidiary bank(s) by a third party either impossible or economically impracticable.
(2) After a careful review of a number of these agreements, the Board believes that investments in nonvoting stock, absent other arrangements, can be consistent with the Act. Some of the agreements reviewed appear consistent with the Act since they are limited to investments of relatively moderate size in nonvoting equity that may become voting equity only if interstate banking is authorized.
(3) However, other agreements reviewed by the Board raise substantial problems of consistency with the control provisions of the Act because the investors, uncertain whether or when interstate banking may be authorized, have evidently sought to assure the soundness of their investments, prevent takeovers by others, and allow for sale of their options, warrants, or rights to a person of the investor's choice in the event a third party obtains control of the acquiree or the investor otherwise becomes dissatisfied with its investment. Since the Act precludes the investors from protecting their investments through ownership or use of voting shares or other exercise of control, the investors have substituted contractual agreements for rights normally achieved through voting shares.
(4) For example, various covenants in certain of the agreements seek to assure the continuing soundness of the investment by substantially limiting the discretion of the acquiree's management over major policies and decisions, including restrictions on entering into new banking activities without the investor's approval and requirements for extensive consultations with the investor on financial matters. By their terms, these covenants suggest control by the investing company over the management and policies of the acquiree.
(5) Similarly, certain of the agreements deprive the acquiree bank holding company, by covenant or because of an option, of the right to sell, transfer, or encumber a majority or all of the voting shares of its subsidiary bank(s) with the aim of maintaining the integrity of the investment and preventing takeovers by others. These long-term restrictions on voting shares fall within the presumption in the Board's Regulation Y that attributes control of shares to any company that enters into any agreement placing long-term restrictions on the rights of a holder of voting securities. (12 CFR 225.2(b)(4)).
(6) Finally, investors wish to reserve the right to sell their options, warrants or rights to a person of their choice to prevent being locked into what may become an unwanted investment. The Board has taken the position that the ability to control the ultimate disposition of voting shares to a person of the investor's choice and to secure the economic benefits therefrom indicates control of the shares under the Act. 1 Moreover, the ability to transfer rights to large blocks of voting shares, even if nonvoting in the hands of the investing company, may result in such a substantial position of leverage over the management of the acquiree as to involve a structure that inevitably results in control prohibited by the Act.
1 See Board letter dated March 18, 1982, to C. A. Cavendes, Sociedad Financiera.
(d) Provisions that avoid control. (1) In the context of any particular agreement, provisions of the type described above may be acceptable if combined with other provisions that serve to preclude control. The Board believes that such agreements will not be consistent with the Act unless provisions are included that will preserve management's discretion over the policies and decisions of the acquiree and avoid control of voting shares.
(2) As a first step towards avoiding control, covenants in any agreement should leave management free to conduct banking and permissible nonbanking activities. Another step to avoid control is the right of the acquiree to “call” the equity investment and options or warrants to assure that covenants that may become inhibiting can be avoided by the acquiree. This right makes such investments or agreements more like a loan in which the borrower has a right to escape covenants and avoid the lender's influence by prepaying the loan.
(3) A measure to avoid problems of control arising through the investor's control over the ultimate disposition of rights to substantial amounts of voting shares of the acquiree would be a provision granting the acquiree a right of first refusal before warrants, options or other rights may be sold and requiring a public and dispersed distribution of these rights if the right of first refusal is not exercised.
(4) In this connection, the Board believes that agreements that involve rights to less than 25 percent of the voting shares, with a requirement for a dispersed public distribution in the event of sale, have a much greater prospect of achieving consistency with the Act than agreements involving a greater percentage. This guideline is drawn by analogy from the provision in the Act that ownership of 25 percent or more of the voting securities of a bank constitutes control of the bank.
(5) The Board expects that one effect of this guideline would be to hold down the size of the nonvoting equity investment by the investing company relative to the acquiree's total equity, thus avoiding the potential for control because the investor holds a very large proportion of the acquiree's total equity. Observance of the 25 percent guideline will also make provisions in agreements providing for a right of first refusal or a public and widely dispersed offering of rights to the acquiree's shares more practical and realistic.
(6) Finally, certain arrangements should clearly be avoided regardless of other provisions in the agreement that are designed to avoid control. These are:
(i) Agreements that enable the investing bank holding company (or its designee) to direct in any manner the voting of more than 5 per cent of the voting shares of the acquiree;
(ii) Agreements whereby the investing company has the right to direct the acquiree's use of the proceeds of an equity investment by the investing company to effect certain actions, such as the purchase and redemption of the acquiree's voting shares; and
(iii) The acquisition of more than 5 per cent of the voting shares of the acquiree that “simultaneously” with their acquisition by the investing company become nonvoting shares, remain nonvoting shares while held by the investor, and revert to voting shares when transferred to a third party.
(e) Review by the Board. This statement does not constitute the exclusive scope of the Board's concerns, nor are the considerations with respect to control outlined in this statement an exhaustive catalog of permissible or impermissible arrangements. The Board has instructed its staff to review agreements of the kind discussed in this statement and to bring to the Board's attention those that raise problems of consistency with the Act. In this regard, companies are requested to notify the Board of the terms of such proposed merger or asset acquisition agreements or nonvoting equity investments prior to their execution or consummation.
§ 225.145   Limitations established by the Competitive Equality Banking Act of 1987 on the activities and growth of nonbank banks.
(a) Introduction. Effective August 10, 1987, the Competitive Equality Banking Act of 1987 (“CEBA”) redefined the term “bank” in the Bank Holding Company Act (“BHC Act” or “Act”) to include any bank the deposits of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as well as any other institution that accepts demand or checkable deposit accounts and is engaged in the business of making commercial loans. 12 U.S.C. 1841(c). CEBA also contained a grandfather provision for certain companies affected by this redefinition. CEBA amended section 4 of the BHC Act to permit a company that on March 5, 1987, controlled a nonbank bank (an institution that became a bank as a result of enactment of CEBA) and that was not a bank holding company on August 9, 1987, to retain its nonbank bank and not be treated as a bank holding company for purposes of the BHC Act if the company and its subsidiary nonbank bank observe certain limitations imposed by CEBA. 1 Certain of these limitations are codified in section 4(f)(3) of the BHC Act and generally restrict nonbank banks from commencing new activities or certain cross-marketing activities with affiliates after March 5, 1987, or permitting overdrafts for affiliates or incurring overdrafts on behalf of affiliates at a Federal Reserve Bank. 12 U.S.C. 1843(f)(3). 2 The Board's views regarding the meaning and scope of these limitations are set forth below and in provisions of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.52).
1 12 U.S.C. 1843(f). Such a company is treated as a bank holding company, however, for purposes of the anti-tying provisions in section 106 of the BHC Act Amendments of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1971 et seq. ) and the insider lending limitations of section 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 375b). The company is also subject to certain examination and enforcement provisions to assure compliance with CEBA.
2 CEBA also prohibits, with certain limited exceptions, a company controlling a grandfathered nonbank bank from acquiring control of an additional bank or thrift institution or acquiring, directly or indirectly after March 5, 1987, more than 5 percent of the assets or shares of a bank or thrift institution. 12 U.S.C. 1843(f)(2).
(b) Congressional findings. (1) At the outset, the Board notes that the scope and application of the Act's limitations on nonbank banks must be guided by the Congressional findings set out in section 4(f)(3) of the BHC Act. Congress was aware that these nonbank banks had been acquired by companies that engage in a wide range of nonbanking activities, such as retailing and general securities activities that are forbidden to bank holding companies under section 4 of the BHC Act. In section 4(f)(3), Congress found that nonbank banks controlled by grandfathered nonbanking companies may, because of their relationships with affiliates, be involved in conflicts of interest, concentration of resources, or other effects adverse to bank safety and soundness. Congress also found that nonbank banks may be able to compete unfairly against banks controlled by bank holding companies by combining banking services with financial services not permissible for bank holding companies. Section 4(f)(3) states that the purpose of the nonbank bank limitations is to minimize any such potential adverse effects or inequities by restricting the activities of nonbank banks until further Congressional action in the area of bank powers could be undertaken. Similarly, the Senate Report accompanying CEBA states that the restrictions CEBA places on nonbank banks “will help prevent existing nonbank banks from changing their basic character * * * while Congress considers proposals for comprehensive legislation; from drastically eroding the separation of banking and commerce; and from increasing the potential for unfair competition, conflicts of interest, undue concentration of resources, and other adverse effects.” S. Rep. No. 100-19, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. 12 (1987). See also H. Rep. No. 100-261, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. 124 (1987) (the “Conference Report”).
(2) Thus, Congress explicitly recognized in the statute itself that nonbanking companies controlling grandfathered nonbank banks, which include the many of the nation's largest commercial and financial organizations, were being accorded a significant competitive advantage that could not be matched by bank holding companies because of the general prohibition against nonbanking activities in section 4 of the BHC Act. Congress recognized that this inequality in regulatory approach could inflict serious competitive harm on regulated bank holding companies as the grandfathered entities sought to exploit potential synergies between banking and commercial products and services. See Conference Report at 125-126. The basic and stated purpose of the restrictions on grandfathered nonbank banks is to minimize these potential anticompetitive effects.
(3) The Board believes that the specific CEBA limitations should be implemented in light of these Congressional findings and the legislative intent reflected in the plain meaning of the terms used in the statute. In those instances when the language of the statute did not provide clear guidance, legislative materials and the Congressional intent manifested in the overall statutory structure were considered. The Board also notes that prior precedent requires that grandfather exceptions in the BHC Act, such as the nonbank bank limitations and particularly the exceptions thereto, are to be interpreted narrowly in order to ensure the proper implementation of Congressional intent. 3
3 E.g., Maryland National Corporation, 73 Federal Reserve Bulletin 310, 313-314 (1987). Cf., Spokane & Inland Empire Railroad Co. v. United States, 241 U.S. 344, 350 (1915).
(c) Activity limitation —(1) Scope of activity. (i) The first limitation established under section 4(f)(3) provides that a nonbank bank shall not “engage in any activity in which such bank was not lawfully engaged as of March 5, 1987.” The term activity as used in this provision of CEBA is not defined. The structure and placement of the CEBA activity restriction within section 4 of the BHC Act and its legislative history do, however, provide direction as to certain transactions that Congress intended to treat as separate activities, thereby providing guidance as to the meaning Congress intended to ascribe to the term generally. First, it is clear that the term activity was not meant to refer to banking as a single activity. To the contrary, the term must be viewed as distinguishing between deposit taking and lending activities and treating demand deposit-taking as a separate activity from general deposit-taking and commercial lending as separate from the general lending category.
(ii) Under the activity limitation, a nonbank bank may engage only in activities in which it was “lawfully engaged” as of March 5, 1987. As of that date, a nonbank bank could not have been engaged in both demand deposit-taking and commercial lending activity without placing it and its parent holding company in violation of the BHC Act. Thus, under the activity limitations, a nonbank bank could not after March 5, 1987, commence the demand deposit-taking or commercial lending activity that it did not conduct as of March 5, 1987. The debates and Senate and Conference Reports on CEBA confirm that Congress intended the activity limitation to prevent a grandfathered nonbank bank from converting itself into a full-service bank by both offering demand deposits and engaging in the business of making commercial loans. 4 Thus, these types of transactions provide a clear guide as to the type of banking transactions that would constitute activities under CEBA and the degree of specificity intended by Congress in interpreting that term.
4 Conference Report at 124-25; S. Rep. No. 100-19 at 12, 32; H. Rep. No. 99-175, 99th Cong., 1st Sess. 3 (1985) (“the activities limitation is to prevent an institution engaged in a limited range of functions from expanding into new areas and becoming, in essence, a full-service bank”); 133 Cong. Rec. S4054 (daily ed. March 27, 1987); (Comments of Senator Proxmire).
(iii) It is also clear that the activity limitation was not intended simply to prevent a nonbank bank from both accepting demand deposits and making commercial loans; it has a broader scope and purpose. If Congress had meant the term to refer to just these two activities, it would have used the restriction it used in another section of CEBA dealing with nonbank banks owned by bank holding companies which has this result, i.e., the nonbank bank could not engage in any activity that would have caused it to become a bank under the prior bank definition in the Act. See 12 U.S.C. 1843(g)(1)(A). Indeed, an earlier version of CEBA under consideration by the Senate Banking Committee contained such a provision for nonbank banks owned by commercial holding companies, which was deleted in favor of the broader activity limitation actually enacted. Committee Print No. 1, (Feb. 17, 1987). In this regard, both the Senate Report and Conference Report refer to demand deposit-taking and commercial lending as examples of activities that could be affected by the activity limitation, not as the sole activities to be limited by the provision. 5
5 Conference Report at 124-125; S. Rep. No. 100-19 at 32.
(iv) Finally, additional guidance as to the meaning of the term activity is provided by the statutory context in which the term appears. The activity limitation is contained in section 4 of the BHC Act, which regulates the investments and activities of bank holding companies and their nonbank subsidiaries. The Board believes it reasonable to conclude that by placing the CEBA activity limitation in section 4 of the BHC Act, Congress meant that Board and judicial decisions regarding the meaning of the term activity in that section be looked to for guidance. This is particularly appropriate given the fact that grandfathered nonbank banks, whether owned by bank holding companies or unregulated holding companies, were treated as nonbank companies and not banks before enactment of CEBA.
(v) This interpretation of the term activity draws support from comments by Senator Proxmire during the Senate's consideration of the provision that the term was not intended to apply “on a product-by-product, customer-by-customer basis.” 133 Cong. Rec. S4054-5 (daily ed. March 27, 1987). This is the same manner in which the Board has interpreted the term activity in the nonbanking provision of section 4 as referring to generic categories of activities, not to discrete products and services.
(vi) Accordingly, consistent with the terms and purposes of the legislation and the Congressional intent to minimize unfair competition and the other adverse effects set out in the CEBA findings, the Board concludes that the term activity as used in section 4(f)(3) means any line of banking or nonbanking business. This definition does not, however, envision a product-by-product approach to the activity limitation. The Board believes it would be helpful to describe the application of the activity limitation in the context of the following major categories of activities: deposit-taking, lending, trust, and other activities engaged in by banks.
(2) Deposit-taking activities. (i) With respect to deposit-taking, the Board believes that the activity limitation in section 4(f)(3) generally refers to three types of activity: demand deposit-taking; non-demand deposit-taking with a third party payment capability; and time and savings deposit-taking without third party payment powers. As previously discussed, it is clear from the terms and intent of CEBA that the activity limitation would prevent, and was designed to prevent, nonbank banks that prior to the enactment of CEBA had refrained from accepting demand deposits in order to avoid coverage as a bank under the BHC Act, from starting to take these deposits after enactment of CEBA and thus becoming full-service banks. Accordingly, CEBA requires that the taking of demand deposits be treated as a separate activity.
(ii) The Board also considers nondemand deposits withdrawable by check or other similar means for payment to third parties or others to constitute a separate line of business for purposes of applying the activity limitation. In this regard, the Board has previously recognized that this line of business constitutes a permissible but separate activity under section 4 of the BHC Act. Furthermore, the offering of accounts with transaction capability requires different expertise and systems than non-transaction deposit-taking and represented a distinct new activity that traditionally separated banks from thrift and similar institutions.
(iii) Support for this view may also be found in the House Banking Committee report on proposed legislation prior to CEBA that contained a similar prohibition on new activities for nonbank banks. In discussing the activity limitation, the report recognized a distinction between demand deposits and accounts with transaction capability and those without transaction capability:
With respect to deposits, the Committee recognizes that it is legitimate for an institution currently involved in offering demand deposits or other third party transaction accounts to make use of new technologies that are in the process of replacing the existing check-based, paper payment system. Again, however, the Committee does not believe that technology should be used as a lever for an institution that was only incidentally involved in the payment system to transform itself into a significant offeror of transaction account capability. 6
6 H. Rep. No. 99-175, 99th Cong., 1st Sess. 13 (1985).
(iv) Finally, this distinction between demand and nondemand checkable accounts and accounts not subject to withdrawal by check was specifically recognized by Congress in the redefinition of the term bank in CEBA to include an institution that takes demand deposits or “deposits that the depositor may withdraw by check or other means for payment to third parties or others” as well as in various exemptions from that definition for trust companies, credit card banks, and certain industrial banks. 7
7 See 12 U.S.C. 1841(c)(2) (D), (F), (H), and (I).
(v) Thus, an institution that as of March 5, 1987, offered only time and savings accounts that were not withdrawable by check for payment to third parties could not thereafter begin offering accounts with transaction capability, for example, NOW accounts or other types of transaction accounts.
(3) Lending. As noted, the CEBA activity limitation does not treat lending as a single activity; it clearly distinguishes between commercial and other types of lending. This distinction is also reflected in the definition of bank in the BHC Act in effect both prior to and after enactment of CEBA as well as in various of the exceptions from this definition. In addition, commercial lending is a specialized form of lending involving different techniques and analysis from other types of lending. Based upon these factors, the Board would view commercial lending as a separate and distinct activity for purposes of the activity limitation in section 4(f)(3). The Board's decisions under section 4 of the BHC Act have not generally differentiated between types of commercial lending, and thus the Board would view commercial lending as a single activity for purposes of CEBA. Thus, a nonbank bank that made commercial loans as of March 5, 1987, could make any type of commercial loan thereafter.
(i) Commercial lending. For purposes of the activity limitation, a commercial loan is defined in accordance with the Supreme Court's decision in Board of Governors v. Dimension Financial Corporation, 474 U.S. 361 (1986), as a direct loan to a business customer for the purpose of providing funds for that customer's business. In this regard, the Board notes that whether a particular transaction is a commercial loan must be determined not from the face of the instrument, but from the application of the definition of commercial loan in the Dimension decision to that transaction. Thus, certain transactions of the type mentioned in the Board's ruling at issue in Dimension and in the Senate and Conference Reports in the CEBA legislation 8 would be commercial loans if they meet the test for commercial loans established in Dimension. Under this test, a commercial loan would not include, for example, an open-market investment in a commercial entity that does not involve a borrower-lender relationship or negotiation of credit terms, such as a money market transaction.
8 S. Rep. No. 100-19 at 31; Conference Report at 123.
(ii) Other lending. Based upon the guidance in the Act as to the degree of specificity required in applying the activity limitation with respect to lending, the Board believes that, in addition to commercial lending, there are three other types of lending activities: consumer mortgage lending, consumer credit card lending, and other consumer lending. Mortgage lending and credit card lending are recognized, discrete lines of banking and business activity, involving techniques and processes that are different from and more specialized than those required for general consumer lending. For example, these activities are, in many cases, conducted by specialized institutions, such as mortgage companies and credit card institutions, or through separate organizational structures within an institution, particularly in the case of mortgage lending. Additionally, the Board's decisions under section 4 of the Act have recognized mortgage banking and credit card lending as separate activities for bank holding companies. The Board's Regulation Y reflects this specialization, noting as examples of permissible lending activity: consumer finance, credit card and mortgage lending. 12 CFR 225.25(b)(1). Finally, CEBA itself recognizes the specialized nature of credit card lending by exempting an institution specializing in that activity from the bank definition. For purpose of the activity limitation, a consumer mortgage loan will mean any loan to an individual that is secured by real estate and that is not a commercial loan. A credit card loan would be any loan made to an individual by means of a credit card that is not a commercial loan.
(4) Trust activities. Under section 4 of the Act, the Board has historically treated trust activities as a single activity and has not differentiated the function on the basis of whether the customer was an individual or a business. See 12 CFR 225.25(b)(3). Similarly, the trust company exemption from the bank definition in CEBA makes no distinction between various types of trust activities. Accordingly, the Board would view trust activities as a separate activity without additional differentiation for purposes of the activity limitation in section 4(f)(3).
(5) Other activities. With respect to activities other than the various traditional deposit-taking, lending or trust activities, the Board believes it appropriate, for the reasons discussed above, to apply the activity limitation in section 4(f)(3) as the term activity generally applies in other provisions of section 4 of the BHC Act. Thus, a grandfathered nonbank bank could not, for example, commence after March 5, 1987, any of the following activities (unless it was engaged in such an activity as of that date): discount securities brokerage, full-service securities brokerage investment advisory services, underwriting or dealing in government securities as permissible for member banks, foreign exchange transaction services, real or personal property leasing, courier services, data processing for third parties, insurance agency activities, 9 real estate development, real estate brokerage, real estate syndication, insurance underwriting, management consulting, futures commission merchant, or activities of the general type listed in § 225.25(b) of Regulation Y.
9 In this area, section 4 of the Act does not treat all insurance agency activities as a single activity. Thus, for example, the Act treats the sale of credit-related life, accident and health insurance as a separate activity from general insurance agency activities. See 12 U.S.C. 1843(c)(8).
(6) Meaning of engaged in. In order to be engaged in an activity, a nonbank bank must demonstrate that it had a program in place to provide a particular product or service included within the grandfathered activity to a customer and that it was in fact offering the product or service to customers as of March 5, 1987. Thus, a nonbank bank is not engaged in an activity as of March 5, 1987, if the product or service in question was in a planning state as of that date and had not been offered or delivered to a customer. Consistent with prior Board interpretations of the term activity in the grandfather provisions of section 4, the Board does not believe that a company may be engaged in an activity on the basis of a single isolated transaction that was not part of a program to offer the particular product or to conduct in the activity on an ongoing basis. For example, a nonbank bank that held an interest in a single real estate project would not thereby be engaged in real estate development for purposes of this provision, unless evidence was presented indicating the interest was held under a program to commence a real estate development business.
(7) Meaning of as of The Board believes that the grandfather date “as of March 5, 1987” as used throughout section 4(f)(3) should refer to activities engaged in on March 5, 1987, or a reasonably short period preceding this date not exceeding 13 months. 133 Cong. Rec. S3957 (daily ed. March 26, 1987). (Remarks of Senators Dodd and Proxmire). Activities that the institution had terminated prior to March 5, 1988, however, would not be considered to have been conducted or engaged in as of March 5. For example, if within 13 months of March 5, 1987, the nonbank bank had terminated its commercial lending activity in order to avoid the bank definition in the Act, the nonbank bank could not recommence that activity after enactment of CEBA.
(d) Cross-marketing limitation —(1) In general. Section 4(f)(3) also limits cross-marketing activities by nonbank banks and their affiliates. Under this provision, a nonbank bank may not offer or market a product or service of an affiliate unless the product or service may be offered by bank holding companies generally under section 4(c)(8) of the BHC Act. In addition, a nonbank bank may not permit any of its products or services to be offered or marketed by or through a nonbank affiliate unless the affiliate engages only in activities permissible for a bank holding company under section 4(c)(8). These limitations are subject to an exception for products or services that were being so offered or marketed as of March 5, 1987, but only in the same manner in which they were being offered or marketed as of that date.
(2) Examples of impermissible cross-marketing. The Conference Report illustrates the application of this limitation to the following two covered transactions: (i) products and services of an affiliate that bank holding companies may not offer under the BHC Act, and (ii) products and services of the nonbank bank. In the first case, the restrictions would prohibit, for example, a company from marketing life insurance or automotive supplies through its affiliate nonbank bank because these products are not generally permissible under the BHC Act. Conference Report at 126. In the second case, a nonbank bank may not permit its products or services to be offered or marketed through a life insurance affiliate or automobile parts retailer because these affiliates engage in activities prohibited under the BHC Act. Id.
(3) Permissible cross-marketing. On the other hand, a nonbank bank could offer to its customers consumer loans from an affiliated mortgage banking or consumer finance company. These affiliates could likewise offer their customers the nonbank bank's products or services provided the affiliates engaged only in activities permitted for bank holding companies under the closely-related-to-banking standard of section 4(c)(8) of the BHC Act. If the affiliate is engaged in both permissible and impermissible activities within the meaning of section 4(c)(8) of the BHC Act, however, the affiliate could not offer or market the nonbank bank's products or services.
(4) Product approach to cross-marketing restriction. (i) Unlike the activity restrictions, the cross-marketing restrictions of CEBA apply by their terms to individual products and services. Thus, an affiliate of a nonbank bank that was engaged in activities that are not permissible for bank holding companies and that was marketing a particular product or service of a nonbank bank on the grandfather date could continue to market that product and, as discussed below, could change the terms and conditions of the loan. The nonbank affiliate could not, however, begin to offer or market another product or service of the nonbank bank.
(ii) The Board believes that the term product or service must be interpreted in light of its accepted ordinary commercial usage. In some instances, commercial usage has identified a group of products so closely related that they constitute a product line ( e.g., certificates of deposit) and differences in versions of the product ( e.g., a one-year certificate of deposit) simply represent a difference in the terms of the product. 10 This approach is consistent with the treatment in CEBA's legislative history of certificates of deposit as a product line rather than each particular type of CD as a separate product. 11
10 American Bankers Association, Banking Terminology (1981).
11 During the Senate debates on CEBA, Senator Proxmire in response to a statement from Senator Cranston that the joint-marketing restrictions do not lock into place the specific terms or conditions of the particular grandfathered product or service, stated:
That is correct. For example, if a nonbank bank was jointly marketing on March 5, 1987, a 3 year, $5,000 certificate of deposit, this bill would not prohibit offering in the same manner a 1 year, $2,000 certificate of deposit with a different interest rate. 133 Cong. Rec. S3959 (daily ed. March 26, 1987).
(iii) In the area of consumer lending, the Board believes the following provide examples of different consumer loan products: mortgage loans to finance the purchase of the borrower's residence, unsecured consumer loans, consumer installment loans secured by the personal property to be purchased ( e.g. automobile, boat or home appliance loans), or second mortgage loans. 12 Under this interpretation, a nonbank bank that offered automobile loans through a nonbank affiliate on the grandfather date could market boat loans, appliance loans or any type of secured consumer installment loan through that affiliate. It could not, however, market unsecured consumer loans, home mortgage loans or other types of consumer loans.
12 In this regard, the Supreme Court in United States v. Philadelphia National Bank, noted that “the principal banking products are of course various types of credit, for example: unsecured personal and business loans, mortgage loans, loans secured by securities or accounts receivable, automobile installment and consumer goods, installment loans, tuition financing, bank credit cards, revolving credit funds.” 374 U.S. 321, 326 n.5 (1963).
(iv) In other areas, the Board believes that the determination as to what constitutes a product or service should be made on a case-by-case basis consistent with the principles that the terms product or service must be interpreted in accordance with their ordinary commercial usage and must be narrower in scope than the definition of activity. Essentially, the concept applied in this analysis is one of permitting the continuation of the specific product marketing activity that was undertaken as of March 5, 1987. Thus, for example, while insurance underwriting may constitute a separate activity under CEBA, a nonbank bank could not market a life insurance policy issued by the affiliate if on the grandfather date it had only marketed homeowners' policies issued by the affiliate.
(5) Change in terms and conditions permitted. (i) The cross-marketing restrictions would not limit the ability of the institution to change the specific terms and conditions of a particular grandfathered product or service. The Conference Report indicates a legislative intent not to lock into place the specific terms or conditions of a grandfathered product or service. Conference Report at 126. For example, a nonbank bank marketing a three-year, $5,000 certificate of deposit through an affiliate under the exemption could offer a one-year $2,000 certificate of deposit with a different interest rate after the grandfather date. See footnote 11 above. Modifications that alter the type of product, however, are not permitted. Thus, a nonbank bank that marketed through affiliates on March 5, 1987, only certificates of deposit could not commence marketing MMDA's or NOW accounts after the grandfather date.
(ii) General changes in the character of the product or service as the result of market or technological innovation are similarly permitted to the extent that they do not transform a grandfathered product into a new product. Thus, an unsecured line of credit could not be modified to include a lien on the borrower's residence without becoming a new product.
(6) Meaning of offer or market. In the Board's opinion, the terms offer or market in the cross-marketing restrictions refer to the presentation to a customer of an institution's products or service through any type of program, including telemarketing, advertising brochures, direct mailing, personal solicitation, customer referrals, or joint-marketing agreements or presentations. An institution must have offered or actually marketed the product or service on March 5 or shortly before that date (as discussed above) to qualify for the grandfather privilege. Thus, if the cross-marketing program was in the planning stage on March 5, 1987, the program would not quality for grandfather treatment under CEBA.
(7) Limitations on cross-marketing to in the same manner. (i) The cross-marketing restriction in section 4(f)(3) contains a grandfather provision that permits products or services that would otherwise be prohibited from being offered or marketed under the provision to continue to be offered or marketed by a particular entity if the products or services were being so offered or marketed as of March 5, 1987, but “only in the same manner in which they were being offered or marketed as of that date.” Thus, to qualify for the grandfather provision, the manner of offering or marketing the otherwise prohibited product or service must remain the same as on the grandfather date.
(ii) In interpreting this provision, the Board notes that Congress designed the joint-marketing restrictions to prevent the significant risk to the public posed by the conduct of such activities by insured banks affiliated with companies engaged in general commerce, to ensure objectivity in the credit-granting process and to “minimize the unfair competitive advantage that grandfathered commercial companies owning nonbank banks might otherwise engage over regulated bank holding companies and our competing commercial companies that have no subsidiary bank.” Conference Report at 125-126. The Board believes that determinations regarding the manner of cross-marketing of a particular product or service may best be accomplished by applying the limitation to the particular facts in each case consistent with the stated purpose of this provision of CEBA and the general principle that grandfather restrictions and exceptions to general prohibitions must be narrowly construed in order to prevent the exception from nullifying the rule. Essentially, as in the scope of the term “product or service”, the guiding principle of Congressional intent with respect to this term is to permit only the continuation of the specific types of cross-marketing activity that were undertaken as of March 5, 1987.
(8) Eligibility for cross-marketing grandfather exemption. The Conference Report also clarifies that entitlement to an exemption to continue to cross-market products and services otherwise prohibited by the statute applies only to the specific company that was engaged in the activity as of March 5, 1987. Conference Report at 126. Thus, an affiliate that was not engaged in cross-marketing products or services as of the grandfather date may not commence these activities under the exemption even if such activities were being conducted by another affiliate. Id. ; see also S. Rep. No. 100-19 at 33-34.
(e) Eligibility for grandfathered nonbank bank status. In reviewing the reports required by CEBA, the Board notes that a number of institutions that had not commenced business operations on August 10, 1987, the date of enactment of CEBA, claimed grandfather privileges under section 4(f)(3) of CEBA. To qualify for grandfather privileges under section 4(f)(3), the institution must have “bec[o]me a bank as a result of the enactment of [CEBA]” and must have been controlled by a nonbanking company on March 5, 1987. 12 U.S.C. 1843(f)(1)(A). An institution that did not have FDIC insurance on August 10, 1987, and that did not accept demand deposits or transaction accounts or engage in the business of commercial lending on that date, would not have become a bank as a result of enactment of CEBA. Thus, institutions that had not commenced operations on August 10, 1987, could not qualify for grandfather privileges under section 4(f)(3) of CEBA. This view is supported by the activity limitations of section 4(f)(3), which, as noted, limit the activities of grandfathered nonbank banks to those in which they were lawfully engaged as of March 5, 1987. A nonbank bank that had not commenced conducting business activities on March 5, 1987, could not after enactment of CEBA engage in any activities under this provision.
§ 225.170   What type of investments are permitted by this subpart, and under what conditions may they be made?
(a) What types of investments are permitted by this subpart? Section 4(k)(4)(H) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843(k)(4)(H)) and this subpart authorize a financial holding company, directly or indirectly and as principal or on behalf of one or more persons, to acquire or control any amount of shares, assets or ownership interests of a company or other entity that is engaged in any activity not otherwise authorized for the financial holding company under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act. For purposes of this subpart, shares, assets or ownership interests acquired or controlled under section 4(k)(4)(H) and this subpart are referred to as “merchant banking investments.” A financial holding company may not directly or indirectly acquire or control any merchant banking investment except in compliance with the requirements of this subpart.
(b) Must the investment be a bona fide merchant banking investment? The acquisition or control of shares, assets or ownership interests under this subpart is not permitted unless it is part of a bona fide underwriting or merchant or investment banking activity.
(c) What types of ownership interests may be acquired? Shares, assets or ownership interests of a company or other entity include any debt or equity security, warrant, option, partnership interest, trust certificate or other instrument representing an ownership interest in the company or entity, whether voting or nonvoting.
(d) Where in a financial holding company may merchant banking investments be made? A financial holding company and any subsidiary (other than a depository institution or subsidiary of a depository institution) may acquire or control merchant banking investments. A financial holding company and its subsidiaries may not acquire or control merchant banking investments on behalf of a depository institution or subsidiary of a depository institution.
(e) May assets other than shares be held directly? A financial holding company may not under this subpart acquire or control assets, other than debt or equity securities or other ownership interests in a company, unless:
(1) The assets are held by or promptly transferred to a portfolio company;
(2) The portfolio company maintains policies, books and records, accounts, and other indicia of corporate, partnership or limited liability organization and operation that are separate from the financial holding company and limit the legal liability of the financial holding company for obligations of the portfolio company; and
(3) The portfolio company has management that is separate from the financial holding company to the extent required by § 225.171.
(f) What type of affiliate is required for a financial holding company to make merchant banking investments? A financial holding company may not acquire or control merchant banking investments under this subpart unless the financial holding company qualifies under at least one of the following paragraphs:
(1) Securities affiliate. The financial holding company is or has an affiliate that is registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c, 78o, 78o-4) as:
(i) A broker or dealer; or
(ii) A municipal securities dealer, including a separately identifiable department or division of a bank that is registered as a municipal securities dealer.
(2) Insurance affiliate with an investment adviser affiliate. The financial holding company controls:
(i) An insurance company that is predominantly engaged in underwriting life, accident and health, or property and casualty insurance (other than credit-related insurance), or providing and issuing annuities; and
(ii) A company that:
(A) Is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-1 et seq. ); and
(B) Provides investment advice to an insurance company.
§ 225.171   What are the limitations on managing or operating a portfolio company held as a merchant banking investment?
(a) May a financial holding company routinely manage or operate a portfolio company? Except as permitted in paragraph (e) of this section, a financial holding company may not routinely manage or operate any portfolio company.
(b) When does a financial holding company routinely manage or operate a company? —(1) Examples of routine management or operation —(i) Executive officer interlocks at the portfolio company. A financial holding company routinely manages or operates a portfolio company if any director, officer or employee of the financial holding company serves as or has the responsibilities of an executive officer of the portfolio company.
(ii) Interlocks by executive officers of the financial holding company. (A) Prohibition. A financial holding company routinely manages or operates a portfolio company if any executive officer of the financial holding company serves as or has the responsibilities of an officer or employee of the portfolio company.
(B) Definition. For purposes of paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A) of this section, the term “financial holding company” includes the financial holding company and only the following subsidiaries of the financial holding company:
( 1 ) A securities broker or dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
( 2 ) A depository institution;
( 3 ) An affiliate that engages in merchant banking activities under this subpart or insurance company investment activities under section 4(k)(4)(I) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843(k)(4)(I));
( 4 ) A small business investment company (as defined in section 302(b) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 682(b)) controlled by the financial holding company or by any depository institution controlled by the financial holding company; and
( 5 ) Any other affiliate that engages in significant equity investment activities that are subject to a special capital charge under the capital adequacy rules or guidelines of the Board.
(iii) Covenants regarding ordinary course of business. A financial holding company routinely manages or operates a portfolio company if any covenant or other contractual arrangement exists between the financial holding company and the portfolio company that would restrict the portfolio company's ability to make routine business decisions, such as entering into transactions in the ordinary course of business or hiring officers or employees other than executive officers.
(2) Presumptions of routine management or operation. A financial holding company is presumed to routinely manage or operate a portfolio company if:
(i) Any director, officer, or employee of the financial holding company serves as or has the responsibilities of an officer (other than an executive officer) or employee of the portfolio company; or
(ii) Any officer or employee of the portfolio company is supervised by any director, officer, or employee of the financial holding company (other than in that individual's capacity as a director of the portfolio company).
(c) How may a financial holding company rebut a presumption that it is routinely managing or operating a portfolio company? A financial holding company may rebut a presumption that it is routinely managing or operating a portfolio company under paragraph (b)(2) of this section by presenting information to the Board demonstrating to the Board's satisfaction that the financial holding company is not routinely managing or operating the portfolio company.
(d) What arrangements do not involve routinely managing or operating a portfolio company? —(1) Director representation at portfolio companies. A financial holding company may select any or all of the directors of a portfolio company or have one or more of its directors, officers, or employees serve as directors of a portfolio company if:
(i) The portfolio company employs officers and employees responsible for routinely managing and operating the company; and
(ii) The financial holding company does not routinely manage or operate the portfolio company, except as permitted in paragraph (e) of this section.
(2) Covenants or other provisions regarding extraordinary events. A financial holding company may, by virtue of covenants or other written agreements with a portfolio company, restrict the ability of the portfolio company, or require the portfolio company to consult with or obtain the approval of the financial holding company, to take actions outside of the ordinary course of the business of the portfolio company. Examples of the types of actions that may be subject to these types of covenants or agreements include, but are not limited to, the following:
(i) The acquisition of significant assets or control of another company by the portfolio company or any of its subsidiaries;
(ii) Removal or selection of an independent accountant or auditor or investment banker by the portfolio company;
(iii) Significant changes to the business plan or accounting methods or policies of the portfolio company;
(iv) Removal or replacement of any or all of the executive officers of the portfolio company;
(v) The redemption, authorization or issuance of any equity or debt securities (including options, warrants or convertible shares) of the portfolio company or any borrowing by the portfolio company outside of the ordinary course of business;
(vi) The amendment of the articles of incorporation or by-laws (or similar governing documents) of the portfolio company; and
(vii) The sale, merger, consolidation, spin-off, recapitalization, liquidation, dissolution or sale of substantially all of the assets of the portfolio company or any of its significant subsidiaries.
(3) Providing advisory and underwriting services to, and having consultations with, a portfolio company. A financial holding company may:
(i) Provide financial, investment and management consulting advice to a portfolio company in a manner consistent with and subject to any restrictions on such activities contained in §§ 225.28(b)(6) or 225.86(b)(1) of this part (12 CFR 225.28(b)(6) and 225.86(b)(1));
(ii) Provide assistance to a portfolio company in connection with the underwriting or private placement of its securities, including acting as the underwriter or placement agent for such securities; and
(iii) Meet with the officers or employees of a portfolio company to monitor or provide advice with respect to the portfolio company's performance or activities.
(e) When may a financial holding company routinely manage or operate a portfolio company? —(1) Special circumstances required. A financial holding company may routinely manage or operate a portfolio company only when intervention by the financial holding company is necessary or required to obtain a reasonable return on the financial holding company's investment in the portfolio company upon resale or other disposition of the investment, such as to avoid or address a significant operating loss or in connection with a loss of senior management at the portfolio company.
(2) Duration Limited. A financial holding company may routinely manage or operate a portfolio company only for the period of time as may be necessary to address the cause of the financial holding company's involvement, to obtain suitable alternative management arrangements, to dispose of the investment, or to otherwise obtain a reasonable return upon the resale or disposition of the investment.
(3) Notice required for extended involvement. A financial holding company may not routinely manage or operate a portfolio company for a period greater than nine months without prior written notice to the Board.
(4) Documentation required. A financial holding company must maintain and make available to the Board upon request a written record describing its involvement in routinely managing or operating a portfolio company.
(f) May a depository institution or its subsidiary routinely manage or operate a portfolio company? —(1) In general. A depository institution and a subsidiary of a depository institution may not routinely manage or operate a portfolio company in which an affiliated company owns or controls an interest under this subpart.
(2) Definition applying provisions governing routine management or operation. For purposes of this section other than paragraph (e) and for purposes of § 225.173(d), a financial holding company includes a depository institution controlled by the financial holding company and a subsidiary of such a depository institution.
(3) Exception for certain subsidiaries of depository institutions. For purposes of paragraph (e) of this section, a financial holding company includes a financial subsidiary held in accordance with section 5136A of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 24a) or section 46 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1831w), and a subsidiary that is a small business investment company and that is held in accordance with the Small Business Investment Act (15 U.S.C. 661 et seq. ), and such a subsidiary may, in accordance with the limitations set forth in this section, routinely manage or operate a portfolio company in which an affiliated company owns or controls an interest under this subpart.
§ 225.172   What are the holding periods permitted for merchant banking investments?
(a) Must investments be made for resale? A financial holding company may own or control shares, assets and ownership interests pursuant to this subpart only for a period of time to enable the sale or disposition thereof on a reasonable basis consistent with the financial viability of the financial holding company's merchant banking investment activities.
(b) What period of time is generally permitted for holding merchant banking investments? —(1) In general. Except as provided in this section or § 225.173, a financial holding company may not, directly or indirectly, own, control or hold any share, asset or ownership interest pursuant to this subpart for a period that exceeds 10 years.
(2) Ownership interests acquired from or transferred to companies held under this subpart. For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this section, shares, assets or ownership interests—
(i) Acquired by a financial holding company from a company in which the financial holding company held an interest under this subpart will be considered to have been acquired by the financial holding company on the date that the share, asset or ownership interest was acquired by the company; and
(ii) Acquired by a company from a financial holding company will be considered to have been acquired by the company on the date that the share, asset or ownership interest was acquired by the financial holding company if—
(A) The financial holding company held the share, asset, or ownership interest under this subpart; and
(B) The financial holding company holds an interest in the acquiring company under this subpart.
(3) Interests previously held by a financial holding company under limited authority. For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this section, any shares, assets, or ownership interests previously owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by a financial holding company under any other provision of the Federal banking laws that imposes a limited holding period will if acquired under this subpart be considered to have been acquired by the financial holding company under this subpart on the date the financial holding company first acquired ownership or control of the shares, assets or ownership interests under such other provision of law. For purposes of this paragraph (b)(3), a financial holding company includes a depository institution controlled by the financial holding company and any subsidiary of such a depository institution.
(4) Approval required to hold interests held in excess of time limit. A financial holding company may seek Board approval to own, control or hold shares, assets or ownership interests of a company under this subpart for a period that exceeds the period specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. A request for approval must:
(i) Be submitted to the Board at least 90 days prior to the expiration of the applicable time period;
(ii) Provide the reasons for the request, including information that addresses the factors in paragraph (b)(5) of this section; and
(iii) Explain the financial holding company's plan for divesting the shares, assets or ownership interests.
(5) Factors governing Board determinations. In reviewing any proposal under paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the Board may consider all the facts and circumstances related to the investment, including:
(i) The cost to the financial holding company of disposing of the investment within the applicable period;
(ii) The total exposure of the financial holding company to the company and the risks that disposing of the investment may pose to the financial holding company;
(iii) Market conditions;
(iv) The nature of the portfolio company's business;
(v) The extent and history of involvement by the financial holding company in the management and operations of the company; and
(vi) The average holding period of the financial holding company's merchant banking investments.
(6) Restrictions applicable to investments held beyond time period. A financial holding company that directly or indirectly owns, controls or holds any share, asset or ownership interest of a company under this subpart for a total period that exceeds the period specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must—
(i) For purposes of determining the financial holding company's regulatory capital, apply to the financial holding company's adjusted carrying value of such shares, assets, or ownership interests a capital charge determined by the Board that must be:
(A) Higher than the maximum marginal tier 1 capital charge applicable under part 217 to merchant banking investments held by that financial holding company; and
(B) In no event less than 25 percent of the adjusted carrying value of the investment; and
(ii) Abide by any other restrictions that the Board may impose in connection with granting approval under paragraph (b)(4) of this section.
§ 225.173   How are investments in private equity funds treated under this subpart?
(a) What is a private equity fund? For purposes of this subpart, a “private equity fund” is any company that:
(1) Is formed for the purpose of and is engaged exclusively in the business of investing in shares, assets, and ownership interests of financial and nonfinancial companies for resale or other disposition;
(2) Is not an operating company;
(3) No more than 25 percent of the total equity of which is held, owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by the financial holding company and its directors, officers, employees and principal shareholders;
(4) Has a maximum term of not more than 15 years; and
(5) Is not formed or operated for the purpose of making investments inconsistent with the authority granted under section 4(k)(4)(H) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843(k)(4)(H)) or evading the limitations governing merchant banking investments contained in this subpart.
(b) What form may a private equity fund take? A private equity fund may be a corporation, partnership, limited liability company or other type of company that issues ownership interests in any form.
(c) What is the holding period permitted for interests in private equity funds? —(1) In general. A financial holding company may own, control or hold any interest in a private equity fund under this subpart and any interest in a portfolio company that is owned or controlled by a private equity fund in which the financial holding company owns or controls any interest under this subpart for the duration of the fund, up to a maximum of 15 years.
(2) Request to hold interest for longer period. A financial holding company may seek Board approval to own, control or hold an interest in or held through a private equity fund for a period longer than the duration of the fund in accordance with § 225.172(b) of this subpart.
(3) Application of rules. The rules described in § 225.172(b)(2) and (3) governing holding periods of interests acquired, transferred or previously held by a financial holding company apply to interests in, held through, or acquired from a private equity fund.
(d) How do the restrictions on routine management and operation apply to private equity funds and investments held through a private equity fund? —(1) Portfolio companies held through a private equity fund. A financial holding company may not routinely manage or operate a portfolio company that is owned or controlled by a private equity fund in which the financial holding company owns or controls any interest under this subpart, except as permitted under § 225.171(e).
(2) Private equity funds controlled by a financial holding company. A private equity fund that is controlled by a financial holding company may not routinely manage or operate a portfolio company, except as permitted under § 225.171(e).
(3) Private equity funds that are not controlled by a financial holding company. A private equity fund may routinely manage or operate a portfolio company so long as no financial holding company controls the private equity fund or as permitted under § 225.171(e).
(4) When does a financial holding company control a private equity fund? A financial holding company controls a private equity fund for purposes of this subpart if the financial holding company, including any director, officer, employee or principal shareholder of the financial holding company:
(i) Serves as a general partner, managing member, or trustee of the private equity fund (or serves in a similar role with respect to the private equity fund);
(ii) Owns or controls 25 percent or more of any class of voting shares or similar interests in the private equity fund;
(iii) In any manner selects, controls or constitutes a majority of the directors, trustees or management of the private equity fund; or
(iv) Owns or controls more than 5 percent of any class of voting shares or similar interests in the private equity fund and is the investment adviser to the fund.
§ 225.174   What aggregate thresholds apply to merchant banking investments?
(a) In general. A financial holding company may not, without Board approval, directly or indirectly acquire any additional shares, assets or ownership interests under this subpart or make any additional capital contribution to any company the shares, assets or ownership interests of which are held by the financial holding company under this subpart if the aggregate carrying value of all merchant banking investments held by the financial holding company under this subpart exceeds:
(1) 30 percent of the Tier 1 capital of the financial holding company; or
(2) After excluding interests in private equity funds, 20 percent of the Tier 1 capital of the financial holding company.
(b) How do these thresholds apply to a private equity fund? Paragraph (a) of this section applies to the interest acquired or controlled by the financial holding company under this subpart in a private equity fund. Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to any interest in a company held by a private equity fund or to any interest held by a person that is not affiliated with the financial holding company.
(c) How long do these thresholds remain in effect? This § 225.174 shall cease to be effective on the date that a final rule issued by the Board that specifically addresses the appropriate regulatory capital treatment of merchant banking investments becomes effective.
(d) Qualifying community banking organizations. For purposes of this section, a financial holding company that is a qualifying community banking organization (as defined in § 217.12 of this chapter) that is subject to the community bank leverage ratio framework (as defined in § 217.12 of this chapter) calculates its Tier 1 capital (as defined in § 217.2 of this chapter) in accordance with § 217.12(b) of this chapter.
§ 225.175   What risk management, record keeping and reporting policies are required to make merchant banking investments?
(a) What internal controls and records are necessary? —(1) General. A financial holding company, including a private equity fund controlled by a financial holding company, that makes investments under this subpart must establish and maintain policies, procedures, records and systems reasonably designed to conduct, monitor and manage such investment activities and the risks associated with such investment activities in a safe and sound manner, including policies, procedures, records and systems reasonably designed to:
(i) Monitor and assess the carrying value, market value and performance of each investment and the aggregate portfolio;
(ii) Identify and manage the market, credit, concentration and other risks associated with such investments;
(iii) Identify, monitor and assess the terms, amounts and risks arising from transactions and relationships (including contingent fees or contingent interests) with each company in which the financial holding company holds an interest under this subpart;
(iv) Ensure the maintenance of corporate separateness between the financial holding company and each company in which the financial holding company holds an interest under this subpart and protect the financial holding company and its depository institution subsidiaries from legal liability for the operations conducted and financial obligations of each such company; and
(v) Ensure compliance with this part and any other provisions of law governing transactions and relationships with companies in which the financial holding company holds an interest under this subpart ( e.g., fiduciary principles or sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c, 371c-1), if applicable).
(2) Availability of records. A financial holding company must make the policies, procedures and records required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section available to the Board or the appropriate Reserve Bank upon request.
(b) What periodic reports must be filed? A financial holding company must provide reports to the appropriate Reserve Bank in such format and at such times as the Board may prescribe.
(c) Is notice required for the acquisition of companies? —(1) Fulfillment of statutory notice requirement. Except as required in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, no post-acquisition notice under section 4(k)(6) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843(k)(6)) is required by a financial holding company in connection with an investment made under this subpart if the financial holding company has previously filed a notice under § 225.87 indicating that it had commenced merchant banking investment activities under this subpart.
(2) Notice of large individual investments. A financial holding company must provide written notice to the Board on the appropriate form within 30 days after acquiring more than 5 percent of the voting shares, assets or ownership interests of any company under this subpart, including an interest in a private equity fund, at a total cost to the financial holding company that exceeds the lesser of 5 percent of the Tier 1 capital of the financial holding company or $200 million.
(3) Qualifying community banking organizations. For purposes of this paragraph (c), a financial holding company that is a qualifying community banking organization (as defined in § 217.12 of this chapter) that is subject to the community bank leverage ratio framework (as defined in § 217.12 of this chapter) calculates its Tier 1 capital (as defined in § 217.2 of this chapter) in accordance with § 217.12(b) of this chapter.
§ 225.176   How do the statutory cross marketing and sections 23A and B limitations apply to merchant banking investments?
(a) Are cross marketing activities prohibited? —(1) In general. A depository institution, including a subsidiary of a depository institution, controlled by a financial holding company may not:
(i) Offer or market, directly or through any arrangement, any product or service of any company if more than 5 percent of the company's voting shares, assets or ownership interests are owned or controlled by the financial holding company pursuant to this subpart; or
(ii) Allow any product or service of the depository institution, including any product or service of a subsidiary of the depository institution, to be offered or marketed, directly or through any arrangement, by or through any company described in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section.
(2) How are certain subsidiaries treated? For purposes of paragraph (a)(1) of this section, a subsidiary of a depository institution does not include a financial subsidiary held in accordance with section 5136A of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 24a) or section 46 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act. (12 U.S.C. 1831w), any company held by a company owned in accordance with section 25 or 25A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 601 et seq.; 12 U.S.C. 611 et seq. ), or any company held by a small business investment company owned in accordance with the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 661 et seq. ).
(3) How do the cross marketing restrictions apply to private equity funds? The restriction contained in paragraph (a)(1) of this section does not apply to:
(i) Portfolio companies held by a private equity fund that the financial holding company does not control; or
(ii) The sale, offer or marketing of any interest in a private equity fund, whether or not controlled by the financial holding company.
(b) When are companies held under section 4(k)(4)(H) affiliates under sections 23A and B? —(1) Rebuttable presumption of control. The following rebuttable presumption of control shall apply for purposes of sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c, 371c-1): if a financial holding company directly or indirectly owns or controls more than 15 percent of the total equity of a company pursuant to this subpart, the company shall be presumed to be an affiliate of any member bank that is affiliated with the financial holding company.
(2) Request to rebut presumption. A financial holding company may rebut this presumption by providing information acceptable to the Board demonstrating that the financial holding company does not control the company.
(3) Presumptions that control does not exist. Absent evidence to the contrary, the presumption in paragraph (b)(1) of this section will be considered to have been rebutted without Board approval under paragraph (b)(2) of this section if any one of the following requirements are met:
(i) No officer, director or employee of the financial holding company serves as a director, trustee, or general partner (or individual exercising similar functions) of the company;
(ii) A person that is not affiliated or associated with the financial holding company owns or controls a greater percentage of the equity capital of the portfolio company than the amount owned or controlled by the financial holding company, and no more than one officer or employee of the holding company serves as a director or trustee (or individual exercising similar functions) of the company; or
(iii) A person that is not affiliated or associated with the financial holding company owns or controls more than 50 percent of the voting shares of the portfolio company, and officers and employees of the holding company do not constitute a majority of the directors or trustees (or individuals exercising similar functions) of the company.
(4) Convertible instruments. For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this section, equity capital includes options, warrants and any other instrument convertible into equity capital.
(5) Application of presumption to private equity funds. A financial holding company will not be presumed to own or control the equity capital of a company for purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this section solely by virtue of an investment made by the financial holding company in a private equity fund that owns or controls the equity capital of the company unless the financial holding company controls the private equity fund as described in § 225.173(d)(4).
(6) Application of sections 23A and B to U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks. Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c, 371c-1) shall apply to all covered transactions between each U.S. branch and agency of a foreign bank that acquires or controls, or that is affiliated with a company that acquires or controls, merchant banking investments and—
(i) Any portfolio company that the foreign bank or affiliated company controls or is presumed to control under paragraph (b)(1) of this section; and
(ii) Any company that the foreign bank or affiliated company controls or is presumed to control under paragraph (b)(1) of this section if the company is engaged in acquiring or controlling merchant banking investments and the proceeds of the covered transaction are used for the purpose of funding the company's merchant banking investment activities.
§ 225.177   Definitions.
(a) What do references to a financial holding company include? (1) Except as otherwise expressly provided, the term “financial holding company” as used in this subpart means the financial holding company and all of its subsidiaries, including a private equity fund or other fund controlled by the financial holding company.
(2) Except as otherwise expressly provided, the term “financial holding company” does not include a depository institution or subsidiary of a depository institution or any portfolio company controlled directly or indirectly by the financial holding company.
(b) What do references to a depository institution include? For purposes of this subpart, the term “depository institution” includes a U.S. branch or agency of a foreign bank.
(c) What is a portfolio company? A portfolio company is any company or entity:
(1) That is engaged in any activity not authorized for the financial holding company under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843); and
(2) Any shares, assets or ownership interests of which are held, owned or controlled directly or indirectly by the financial holding company pursuant to this subpart, including through a private equity fund that the financial holding company controls.
(d) Who are the executive officers of a company? (1) An executive officer of a company is any person who participates or has the authority to participate (other than in the capacity as a director) in major policymaking functions of the company, whether or not the officer has an official title, the title designates the officer as an assistant, or the officer serves without salary or other compensation.
(2) The term “executive officer” does not include—
(i) Any person, including a person with an official title, who may exercise a certain measure of discretion in the performance of his duties, including the discretion to make decisions in the ordinary course of the company's business, but who does not participate in the determination of major policies of the company and whose decisions are limited by policy standards fixed by senior management of the company; or
(ii) Any person who is excluded from participating (other than in the capacity of a director) in major policymaking functions of the company by resolution of the board of directors or by the bylaws of the company and who does not in fact participate in such policymaking functions.
§ 225.180   Definitions.
For purposes of this subpart:
(a) Banking entity means—
(1) Any insured depository institution;
(2) Any company that controls an insured depository institution;
(3) Any company that is treated as a bank holding company for purposes of section 8 of the International Banking Act of 1978; and
(4) Any affiliate or subsidiary of any of the foregoing entities.
(b) Hedge fund and private equity fund mean an issuer that would be an investment company, as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq. ), but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of that Act, or such similar funds as the appropriate Federal banking agencies, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission may, by rule, as provided in section 13(b)(2) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851(b)(2)), determine.
(c) Insured depository institution has the same meaning as given that term in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813), except that for purposes of this subpart the term shall not include an institution that functions solely in a trust or fiduciary capacity if—
(1) All or substantially all of the deposits of such institution are in trust funds and are received in a bona fide fiduciary capacity;
(2) No deposits of such institution which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation are offered or marketed by or through an affiliate of such institution;
(3) Such institution does not accept demand deposits or deposits that the depositor may withdraw by check or similar means for payment to third parties or others or make commercial loans; and
(4) Such institution does not—
(i) Obtain payment or payment related services from any Federal Reserve bank, including any service referred to in section 11A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 248a); or
(ii) Exercise discount or borrowing privileges pursuant to section 19(b)(7) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 416(b)(7)).
(d) Nonbank financial company supervised by the Board means a nonbank financial company supervised by the Board of Governors, as defined in section 102 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5311).
(e) Board means the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
(f) Illiquid fund means a hedge fund or private equity fund that:
(1) As of May 1, 2010—
(i) Was principally invested in illiquid assets; or
(ii) Was invested in, and contractually committed to principally invest in, illiquid assets; and
(2) Makes all investments pursuant to, and consistent with, an investment strategy to principally invest in illiquid assets.
(g) Illiquid assets means any real property, security, obligation, or other asset that—
(1) Is not a liquid asset;
(2) Because of statutory or regulatory restrictions applicable to the hedge fund, private equity fund or asset, cannot be offered, sold, or otherwise transferred by the hedge fund or private equity fund to a person that is unaffiliated with the relevant banking entity; or
(3) Because of contractual restrictions applicable to the hedge fund, private equity fund or asset, cannot be offered, sold, or otherwise transferred by the hedge fund or private equity fund for a period of 3 years or more to a person that is unaffiliated with the relevant banking entity.
(h) Liquid asset means:
(1) Cash or cash equivalents;
(2) An asset that is traded on a recognized, established exchange, trading facility or other market on which there exist independent, bona fide offers to buy and sell so that a price reasonably related to the last sales price or current bona fide competitive bid and offer quotations can be determined for the particular asset almost instantaneously;
(3) An asset for which there are bona fide, competitive bid and offer quotations in a recognized inter-dealer quotation system or similar system or for which multiple dealers furnish bona fide, competitive bid and offer quotations to other brokers and dealers on request;
(4) An asset the price of which is quoted routinely in a widely disseminated publication that is readily available to the general public or through an electronic service that provides indicative data from real-time financial networks;
(5) An asset with an initial term of one year or less and the payments on which at maturity may be settled, closed-out, or paid in cash or one or more other liquid assets described in paragraphs (h)(1), (2), (3), or (4); and
(6) Any other asset that the Board determines, based on all the facts and circumstances, is a liquid asset.
(i) Principally invested and related definitions. A hedge fund or private equity fund:
(1) Is principally invested in illiquid assets if at least 75 percent of the fund's consolidated total assets are—
(i) Illiquid assets; or
(ii) Risk-mitigating hedges entered into in connection with and related to individual or aggregated positions in, or holdings of, illiquid assets;
(2) Is contractually committed to principally invest in illiquid assets if the fund's organizational documents, other documents that constitute a contractual obligation of the fund, or written representations contained in the fund's offering materials distributed to potential investors provide for the fund to be principally invested in assets described in paragraph (i)(1) at all times other than during temporary periods, such as the period prior to the initial receipt of capital contributions from investors or the period during which the fund's investments are being liquidated and capital and profits are being returned to investors; and
(3) Has an investment strategy to principally invest in illiquid assets if the fund—
(i) Markets or holds itself out to investors as intending to principally invest in assets described in paragraph (i)(1) of this section; or
(ii) Has a documented investment policy of principally investing in assets described in paragraph (i)(1) of this section.
§ 225.181   Conformance Period for Banking Entities Engaged in Prohibited Proprietary Trading or Private Fund Activities.
(a) Conformance Period —(1) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) or (3) of this section, a banking entity shall bring its activities and investments into compliance with the requirements of section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851) and this subpart no later than 2 years after the earlier of:
(i) July 21, 2012; or
(ii) Twelve months after the date on which final rules adopted under section 13(b)(2) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851(b)(2)) are published in the Federal Register.
(2) New banking entities. A company that was not a banking entity, or a subsidiary or affiliate of a banking entity, as of July 21, 2010, and becomes a banking entity, or a subsidiary or affiliate of a banking entity, after that date shall bring its activities and investments into compliance with the requirements of section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851) and this subpart before the later of—
(i) The conformance date determined in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section; or
(ii) Two years after the date on which the company becomes a banking entity or a subsidiary or affiliate of a banking entity.
(3) Extended conformance period. The Board may extend the two-year period under paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section by not more than three separate one-year periods, if, in the judgment of the Board, each such one-year extension is consistent with the purposes of section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851) and this subpart and would not be detrimental to the public interest.
(b) Illiquid funds —(1) Extended transition period. The Board may further extend the period provided by paragraph (a) of this section during which a banking entity may acquire or retain an equity, partnership, or other ownership interest in, or otherwise provide additional capital to, a private equity fund or hedge fund if—
(i) The fund is an illiquid fund; and
(ii) The acquisition or retention of such interest, or provision of additional capital, is necessary to fulfill a contractual obligation of the banking entity that was in effect on May 1, 2010.
(2) Duration limited. The Board may grant a banking entity only one extension under paragraph (b)(1) of this section and such extension—
(i) May not exceed 5 years beyond any conformance period granted under paragraph (a)(3) of this section; and
(ii) Shall terminate automatically on the date during any such extension on which the banking entity is no longer under a contractual obligation described in paragraph (b)(1)(ii).
(3) Contractual obligation. For purposes of this paragraph (b)—
(i) A banking entity has a contractual obligation to take or retain an equity, partnership, or other ownership interest in an illiquid fund if the banking entity is prohibited from redeeming all of its equity, partnership, or other ownership interests in the fund, and from selling or otherwise transferring all such ownership interests to a person that is not an affiliate of the banking entity—
(A) Under the terms of the banking entity's equity, partnership, or other ownership interest in the fund or the banking entity's other contractual arrangements with the fund or unaffiliated investors in the fund; or
(B) If the banking entity is the sponsor of the fund, under the terms of a written representation made by the banking entity in the fund's offering materials distributed to potential investors;
(ii) A banking entity has a contractual obligation to provide additional capital to an illiquid fund if the banking entity is required to provide additional capital to such fund—
(A) Under the terms of its equity, partnership or other ownership interest in the fund or the banking entity's other contractual arrangements with the fund or unaffiliated investors in the fund; or
(B) If the banking entity is the sponsor of the fund, under the terms of a written representation made by the banking entity in the fund's offering materials distributed to potential investors; and
(iii) A banking entity shall be considered to have a contractual obligation for purposes of paragraph (b)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section only if—
(A) The obligation may not be terminated by the banking entity or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates under the terms of its agreement with the fund; and
(B) In the case of an obligation that may be terminated with the consent of other persons, the banking entity and its subsidiaries and affiliates have used their reasonable best efforts to obtain such consent and such consent has been denied.
(c) Approval required to hold interests in excess of time limit. The conformance period in paragraph (a) of this section may be extended in accordance with paragraph (a)(3) or (b) of this section only with the approval of the Board. A banking entity that seeks the Board's approval for an extension of the conformance period under paragraph (a)(3) or for an extended transition period under paragraph (b)(1) must—
(1) Submit a request in writing to the Board at least 180 days prior to the expiration of the applicable time period;
(2) Provide the reasons why the banking entity believes the extension should be granted, including information that addresses the factors in paragraph (d)(1) of this section; and
(3) Provide a detailed explanation of the banking entity's plan for divesting or conforming the activity or investment(s).
(d) Factors governing Board determinations —(1) Extension requests generally. In reviewing any application by a specific company for an extension under paragraph (a)(3) or (b)(1) of this section, the Board may consider all the facts and circumstances related to the activity, investment, or fund, including, to the extent relevant—
(i) Whether the activity or investment—
(A) Involves or results in material conflicts of interest between the banking entity and its clients, customers or counterparties;
(B) Would result, directly or indirectly, in a material exposure by the banking entity to high-risk assets or high-risk trading strategies;
(C) Would pose a threat to the safety and soundness of the banking entity; or
(D) Would pose a threat to the financial stability of the United States;
(ii) Market conditions;
(iii) The nature of the activity or investment;
(iv) The date that the banking entity's contractual obligation to make or retain an investment in the fund was incurred and when it expires;
(v) The contractual terms governing the banking entity's interest in the fund;
(vi) The degree of control held by the banking entity over investment decisions of the fund;
(vii) The types of assets held by the fund, including whether any assets that were illiquid when first acquired by the fund have become liquid assets, such as, for example, because any statutory, regulatory, or contractual restrictions on the offer, sale, or transfer of such assets have expired;
(viii) The date on which the fund is expected to wind up its activities and liquidate, or its investments may be redeemed or sold;
(ix) The total exposure of the banking entity to the activity or investment and the risks that disposing of, or maintaining, the investment or activity may pose to the banking entity or the financial stability of the United States;
(x) The cost to the banking entity of divesting or disposing of the activity or investment within the applicable period;
(xi) Whether the divestiture or conformance of the activity or investment would involve or result in a material conflict of interest between the banking entity and unaffiliated clients, customers or counterparties to which it owes a duty;
(xii) The banking entity's prior efforts to divest or conform the activity or investment(s), including, with respect to an illiquid fund, the extent to which the banking entity has made efforts to terminate or obtain a waiver of its contractual obligation to take or retain an equity, partnership, or other ownership interest in, or provide additional capital to, the illiquid fund; and
(xiii) Any other factor that the Board believes appropriate.
(2) Timing of Board review. The Board will seek to act on any request for an extension under paragraph (a)(3) or (b)(1) of this section no later than 90 calendar days after the receipt of a complete record with respect to such request.
(3) Consultation. In the case of a banking entity that is primarily supervised by another Federal banking agency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Board will consult with such agency prior to the approval of a request by the banking entity for an extension under paragraph (a)(3) or (b)(1) of this section.
(e) Authority to impose restrictions on activities or investments during any extension period —(1) In general. The Board may impose such conditions on any extension approved under paragraph (a)(3) or (b)(1) of this section as the Board determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the safety and soundness of the banking entity or the financial stability of the United States, address material conflicts of interest or other unsound banking practices, or otherwise further the purposes of section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851) and this subpart.
(2) Consultation. In the case of a banking entity that is primarily supervised by another Federal banking agency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Board will consult with such agency prior to imposing conditions on the approval of a request by the banking entity for an extension under paragraph (a)(3) or (b)(1) of this section.
§ 225.182   Conformance Period for Nonbank Financial Companies Supervised by the Board Engaged in Proprietary Trading or Private Fund Activities.
(a) Divestiture requirement. A nonbank financial company supervised by the Board shall come into compliance with all applicable requirements of section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851) and this subpart, including any capital requirements or quantitative limitations adopted thereunder and applicable to the company, not later than 2 years after the date the company becomes a nonbank financial company supervised by the Board.
(b) Extensions. The Board may, by rule or order, extend the two-year period under paragraph (a) by not more than three separate one-year periods, if, in the judgment of the Board, each such one-year extension is consistent with the purposes of section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851) and this subpart and would not be detrimental to the public interest.
(c) Approval required to hold interests in excess of time limit. A nonbank financial company supervised by the Board that seeks the Board's approval for an extension of the conformance period under paragraph (b) of this section must—
(1) Submit a request in writing to the Board at least 180 days prior to the expiration of the applicable time period;
(2) Provide the reasons why the nonbank financial company supervised by the Board believes the extension should be granted; and
(3) Provide a detailed explanation of the company's plan for conforming the activity or investment(s) to any applicable requirements established under section 13(a)(2) or (f)(4) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851(a)(2) and (f)(4)).
(d) Factors governing Board determinations —(1) In general. In reviewing any application for an extension under paragraph (b) of this section, the Board may consider all the facts and circumstances related to the nonbank financial company and the request including, to the extent determined relevant by the Board, the factors described in § 225.181(d)(1).
(2) Timing. The Board will seek to act on any request for an extension under paragraph (b) of this section no later than 90 calendar days after the receipt of a complete record with respect to such request.
(f) Authority to impose restrictions on activities or investments during any extension period. The Board may impose conditions on any extension approved under paragraph (b) of this section as the Board determines are necessary or appropriate to protect the safety and soundness of the nonbank financial company or the financial stability of the United States, address material conflicts of interest or other unsound practices, or otherwise further the purposes of section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1851) and this subpart.
§ 225.200   Conditions to Board's section 20 orders.
(a) Introduction. Under section 20 of the Glass-Steagall Act (12 U.S.C. 377) and section 4(c)(8) of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843(c)(8)), a nonbank subsidiary of a bank holding company may to a limited extent underwrite and deal in securities for which underwriting and dealing by a member bank is prohibited. Pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, these so-called section 20 subsidiaries are required to register with the SEC as broker-dealers and are subject to all the financial reporting, anti-fraud and financial responsibility rules applicable to broker-dealers. In addition, transactions between insured depository institutions and their section 20 affiliates are restricted by sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c and 371c-1). The Board expects a section 20 subsidiary, like any other subsidiary of a bank holding company, to be operated prudently. Doing so would include observing corporate formalities (such as the maintenance of separate accounting and corporate records), and instituting appropriate risk management, including independent trading and exposure limits consistent with parent company guidelines.
(b) Conditions. As a condition of each order approving establishment of a section 20 subsidiary, a bank holding company shall comply with the following conditions.
(1) Capital. (i) A bank holding company shall maintain adequate capital on a fully consolidated basis. If operating a section 20 authorized to underwrite and deal in all types of debt and equity securities, a bank holding company shall maintain strong capital on a fully consolidated basis.
(ii) In the event that a bank or thrift affiliate of a section 20 subsidiary shall become less than well capitalized (as defined in section 38 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, 12 U.S.C. 1831o), and the bank holding company shall fail to restore it promptly to the well capitalized level, the Board may, in its discretion, reimpose the funding, credit extension and credit enhancement firewalls contained in its 1989 order allowing underwriting and dealing in bank-ineligible securities, 1 or order the bank holding company to divest the section 20 subsidiary.
1 Firewalls 5-8, 19, 21 and 22 of J.P. Morgan & Co., The Chase Manhattan Corp., Bankers Trust New York Corp., Citicorp, and Security Pacific Corp., 75 Federal Reserve Bulletin 192, 214-16 (1989).
(iii) A foreign bank that operates a branch or agency in the United States shall maintain strong capital on a fully consolidated basis at levels above the minimum levels required by the Basle Capital Accord. In the event that the Board determines that the foreign bank's capital has fallen below these levels and the foreign bank fails to restore its capital position promptly, the Board may, in its discretion, reimpose the funding, credit extension and credit enhancement firewalls contained in its 1990 order allowing foreign banks to underwrite and deal in bank-ineligible securities, 2 or order the foreign bank to divest the section 20 subsidiary.
2 Firewalls 5-8, 19, 21 and 22 of Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, The Royal Bank of Canada, Barclays PLC and Barclays Bank PLC, 76 Federal Reserve Bulletin 158, (1990).
(2) Internal controls. (i) Each bank holding company or foreign bank shall cause its subsidiary banks, thrifts, branches or agencies 3 to adopt policies and procedures, including appropriate limits on exposure, to govern their participation in transactions underwritten or arranged by a section 20 affiliate.
3 The terms “branch” and “agency” refer to a U.S. branch and agency of a foreign bank.
(ii) Each bank holding company or foreign bank shall ensure that an independent and thorough credit evaluation has been undertaken in connection with participation by a bank, thrift, or branch or agency in such transactions, and that adequate documentation of that evaluation is maintained for review by examiners of the appropriate federal banking agency and the Federal Reserve.
(3) Interlocks restriction. (i) Directors, officers or employees of a bank or thrift subsidiary of a bank holding company, or a bank or thrift subsidiary or branch or agency of a foreign bank, shall not serve as a majority of the board of directors or the chief executive officer of an affiliated section 20 subsidiary.
(ii) Directors, officers or employees of a section 20 subsidiary shall not serve as a majority of the board of directors or the chief executive officer of an affiliated bank or thrift subsidiary or branch or agency, except that the manager of a branch or agency may act as a director of the underwriting subsidiary.
(iii) For purposes of this standard, the manager of a branch or agency of a foreign bank generally will be considered to be the chief executive officer of the branch or agency.
(4) Customer disclosure —(i) Disclosure to section 20 customers. A section 20 subsidiary shall provide, in writing, to each of its retail customers, 4 at the time an investment account is opened, the same minimum disclosures, and obtain the same customer acknowledgment, described in the Interagency Statement on Retail Sales of Nondeposit Investment Products (Statement) as applicable in such situations. These disclosures must be provided regardless of whether the section 20 subsidiary is itself engaged in activities through arrangements with a bank that is covered by the Statement.
4 For purposes of this operating standard, a retail customer is any customer that is not an “accredited investor” as defined in 17 CFR 230.501(a).
(ii) Disclosures accompanying investment advice. A director, officer, or employee of a bank, thrift, branch or agency may not express an opinion on the value or the advisability of the purchase or the sale of a bank-ineligible security that he or she knows is being underwritten or dealt in by a section 20 affiliate unless he or she notifies the customer of the affiliate's role.
(5) Intra-day credit. Any intra-day extension of credit to a section 20 subsidiary by an affiliated bank, thrift, branch or agency shall be on market terms consistent with section 23B of the Federal Reserve Act.
(6) Restriction on funding purchases of securities during underwriting period. No bank, thrift, branch or agency shall knowingly extend credit to a customer secured by, or for the purpose of purchasing, any bank-ineligible security that a section 20 affiliate is underwriting or has underwritten within the past 30 days, unless:
(i) The extension of credit is made pursuant to, and consistent with any conditions imposed in a preexisting line of credit that was not established in contemplation of the underwriting; or
(ii) The extension of credit is made in connection with clearing transactions for the section 20 affiliate.
(7) Reporting requirement. (i) Each bank holding company or foreign bank shall submit quarterly to the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank any FOCUS report filed with the NASD or other self-regulatory organizations, and any information required by the Board to monitor compliance with these operating standards and section 20 of the Glass-Steagall Act, on forms provided by the Board.
(ii) In the event that a section 20 subsidiary is required to furnish notice concerning its capitalization to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to 17 CFR 240.17a-11, a copy of the notice shall be filed concurrently with the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank.
(8) Foreign banks. A foreign bank shall ensure that any extension of credit by its branch or agency to a section 20 affiliate, and any purchase by such branch or agency, as principal or fiduciary, of securities for which a section 20 affiliate is a principal underwriter, conforms to sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act, and that its branches and agencies not advertise or suggest that they are responsible for the obligations of a section 20 affiliate, consistent with section 23B(c) of the Federal Reserve Act.
§ 225.190   Authority, purpose, and scope.
(a) Authority. This subpart is issued by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the Board) pursuant to title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) (Pub. L. 101-73, 103 Stat. 183 (1989)), 12 U.S.C. 3310, 3331-3351, section 1473 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 12 U.S.C. 3353, and section 5(b) of the Bank Holding Company Act, 12 U.S.C. 1844(b).
(b) Purpose and scope. (1) The purpose of this subpart is to implement sections 1109, 1117, 1121, and 1124 of FIRREA Title XI, 12 U.S.C. 3338, 3346, 3350, and 3353. Title XI provides protection for Federal financial and public policy interests in real estate related transactions by requiring real estate appraisals used in connection with Federally related transactions to be performed in writing, in accordance with uniform standards, by appraisers whose competency has been demonstrated and whose professional conduct will be subject to effective supervision. This subpart implements the requirements of title XI as amended by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and applies to all Federally related transactions and to States and to appraisal management companies (AMCs) performing appraisal management services in connection with consumer credit transactions secured by a consumer's principal dwelling or securitizations of those transactions.
(2) This subpart:
(i) Identifies which real estate related financial transactions require the services of an appraiser.
(ii) Prescribes which categories of Federally related transactions shall be appraised by a State-certified appraiser and which by a State-licensed appraiser;
(iii) Prescribes minimum standards for the performance of real estate appraisals in connection with Federal related transactions under the jurisdiction of the Board;
(iv) Prescribes minimum requirements to be applied by participating States in the registration and supervision of AMCs; and
(v) Prescribes minimum requirements to be applied by participating States to report certain information concerning AMCs registered with the States to a national registry of AMCs.
(c) Rule of construction. Nothing in this subpart should be construed to prevent a State from establishing requirements in addition to those in this subpart. In addition, nothing in this subpart should be construed to alter guidance in, and applicability of, the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines 1 or other relevant agency guidance that cautions banks and bank holding companies, that each organization is accountable for overseeing the activities of third-party service providers and ensuring that any services provided by a third party comply with applicable laws, regulations, and supervisory guidance applicable directly to the creditor.
1 See, Agencies issue final appraisal and evalutation guidelines, http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/bcreg/20101202a.htm.
§ 225.191   Definitions.
For purposes of this subpart:
(a) Affiliate has the meaning provided in 12 U.S.C. 1841.
(b) AMC National Registry means the registry of State-registered AMCs and Federally regulated AMCs maintained by the Appraisal Subcommittee.
(c) Appraisal Foundation means the Appraisal Foundation established on November 30, 1987, as a not-for-profit corporation under the laws of Illinois.
(d)(1) Appraisal management company (AMC) means a person that:
(i) Provides appraisal management services to creditors or to secondary mortgage market participants, including affiliates;
(ii) Provides such services in connection with valuing a consumer's principal dwelling as security for a consumer credit transaction or incorporating such transactions into securitizations; and
(iii) Within a 12-month period, as defined in § 225.192(d), oversees an appraiser panel of more than 15 State-certified or State-licensed appraisers in a State or 25 or more State-certified or State-licensed appraisers in two or more States, as described in § 225.192;
(2) An AMC does not include a department or division of an entity that provides appraisal management services only to that entity.
(e) Appraisal management services means one or more of the following:
(1) Recruiting, selecting, and retaining appraisers;
(2) Contracting with State-certified or State-licensed appraisers to perform appraisal assignments;
(3) Managing the process of having an appraisal performed, including providing administrative services such as receiving appraisal orders and appraisal reports, submitting completed appraisal reports to creditors and secondary market participants, collecting fees from creditors and secondary market participants for services provided, and paying appraisers for services performed; and
(4) Reviewing and verifying the work of appraisers.
(f) Appraiser panel means a network, list or roster of licensed or certified appraisers approved by an AMC to perform appraisals as independent contractors for the AMC. Appraisers on an AMC's “appraiser panel” under this part include both appraisers accepted by the AMC for consideration for future appraisal assignments in covered transactions or for secondary mortgage market participants in connection with covered transactions and appraisers engaged by the AMC to perform one or more appraisals in covered transactions or for secondary mortgage market participants in connection with covered transactions. An appraiser is an independent contractor for purposes of this part if the appraiser is treated as an independent contractor by the AMC for purposes of Federal income taxation.
(g) Consumer credit means credit offered or extended to a consumer primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.
(h) Covered transaction means any consumer credit transaction secured by the consumer's principal dwelling.
(i) Creditor means:
(1) A person who regularly extends consumer credit that is subject to a finance charge or is payable by written agreement in more than four installments (not including a down payment), and to whom the obligation is initially payable, either on the face of the note or contract, or by agreement when there is no note or contract.
(2) A person regularly extends consumer credit if the person extended credit (other than credit subject to the requirements of 12 CFR 1026.32) more than 5 times for transactions secured by a dwelling in the preceding calendar year. If a person did not meet these numerical standards in the preceding calendar year, the numerical standards shall be applied to the current calendar year. A person regularly extends consumer credit if, in any 12-month period, the person originates more than one credit extension that is subject to the requirements of 12 CFR 1026.32 or one or more such credit extensions through a mortgage broker.
(j) Dwelling means:
(1) A residential structure that contains one to four units, whether or not that structure is attached to real property. The term includes an individual condominium unit, cooperative unit, mobile home, and trailer, if it is used as a residence.
(2) A consumer can have only one “principal” dwelling at a time. Thus, a vacation or other second home would not be a principal dwelling. However, if a consumer buys or builds a new dwelling that will become the consumer's principal dwelling within a year or upon the completion of construction, the new dwelling is considered the principal dwelling for purposes of this section.
(k) Federally regulated AMC means an AMC that is owned and controlled by an insured depository institution, as defined in 12 U.S.C. 1813 and regulated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
(l) Federally related transaction regulations means regulations established by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or the National Credit Union Administration, pursuant to sections 1112, 1113, and 1114 of FIRREA Title XI, 12 U.S.C. 3341-3343.
(m) Person means a natural person or an organization, including a corporation, partnership, proprietorship, association, cooperative, estate, trust, or government unit.
(n) Secondary mortgage market participant means a guarantor or insurer of mortgage-backed securities, or an underwriter or issuer of mortgage-backed securities. Secondary mortgage market participant only includes an individual investor in a mortgage-backed security if that investor also serves in the capacity of a guarantor, insurer, underwriter, or issuer for the mortgage-backed security.
(o) States mean the 50 States and the District of Columbia and the territories of Guam, Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
(p) Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) means the appraisal standards promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation.
§ 225.192   Appraiser panel—annual size calculation.
For purposes of determining whether, within a 12-month period, an AMC oversees an appraiser panel of more than 15 State-certified or State-licensed appraisers in a State or 25 or more State-certified or State-licensed appraisers in two or more States pursuant to § 225.191(d)(1)(iii)-
(a) An appraiser is deemed part of the AMC's appraiser panel as of the earliest date on which the AMC:
(1) Accepts the appraiser for the AMC's consideration for future appraisal assignments in covered transactions or for secondary mortgage market participants in connection with covered transactions; or
(2) Engages the appraiser to perform one or more appraisals on behalf of a creditor for a covered transaction or secondary mortgage market participant in connection with a covered transaction.
(b) An appraiser who is deemed part of the AMC's appraiser panel pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section is deemed to remain on the panel until the date on which the AMC:
(1) Sends written notice to the appraiser removing the appraiser from the appraiser panel, with an explanation of its action; or
(2) Receives written notice from the appraiser asking to be removed from the appraiser panel or notice of the death or incapacity of the appraiser.
(c) If an appraiser is removed from an AMC's appraiser panel pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section, but the AMC subsequently accepts the appraiser for consideration for future assignments or engages the appraiser at any time during the twelve months after the AMC's removal, the removal will be deemed not to have occurred, and the appraiser will be deemed to have been part of the AMC's appraiser panel without interruption.
(d) The period for purposes of counting appraisers on an AMC's appraiser panel may be the calendar year or a 12-month period established by law or rule of each State with which the AMC is required to register.
§ 225.193   Appraisal management company registration.
Each State electing to register AMCs pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this section must:
(a) Establish and maintain within the State appraiser certifying and licensing agency a licensing program that is subject to the limitations set forth in § 225.194 and with the legal authority and mechanisms to:
(1) Review and approve or deny an AMC's application for initial registration;
(2) Review and renew or review and deny an AMC's registration periodically;
(3) Examine the books and records of an AMC operating in the State and require the AMC to submit reports, information, and documents;
(4) Verify that the appraisers on the AMC's appraiser panel hold valid State certifications or licenses, as applicable;
(5) Conduct investigations of AMCs to assess potential violations of applicable appraisal-related laws, regulations, or orders;
(6) Discipline, suspend, terminate, or deny renewal of the registration of an AMC that violates applicable appraisal-related laws, regulations, or orders; and
(7) Report an AMC's violation of applicable appraisal-related laws, regulations, or orders, as well as disciplinary and enforcement actions and other relevant information about an AMC's operations, to the Appraisal Subcommittee.
(b) Impose requirements on AMCs that are not owned and controlled by an insured depository institution and not regulated by a Federal financial institutions regulatory agency to:
(1) Register with and be subject to supervision by the State appraiser certifying and licensing agency;
(2) Engage only State-certified or State-licensed appraisers for Federally related transactions in conformity with any Federally related transaction regulations;
(3) Establish and comply with processes and controls reasonably designed to ensure that the AMC, in engaging an appraiser, selects an appraiser who is independent of the transaction and who has the requisite education, expertise, and experience necessary to competently complete the appraisal assignment for the particular market and property type;
(4) Direct the appraiser to perform the assignment in accordance with USPAP; and
(5) Establish and comply with processes and controls reasonably designed to ensure that the AMC conducts its appraisal management services in accordance with the requirements of section 129E(a)-(i) of the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. 1639e(a)-(i), and regulations thereunder.
§ 225.194   Ownership limitations for State-registered appraisal management companies.
(a) Appraiser certification or licensing of owners. (1) An AMC subject to State registration pursuant to § 225.193 shall not be registered by a State or included on the AMC National Registry if such AMC, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, is owned by any person who has had an appraiser license or certificate refused, denied, cancelled, surrendered in lieu of revocation, or revoked in any State for a substantive cause, as determined by the appropriate State appraiser certifying and licensing agency.
(2) An AMC subject to State registration pursuant to § 225.193 is not barred by paragraph (a)(1) of this section from being registered by a State or included on the AMC National Registry if the license or certificate of the appraiser with an ownership interest was not revoked for a substantive cause and has been reinstated by the State or States in which the appraiser was licensed or certified.
(b) Good moral character of owners. An AMC shall not be registered by a State if any person that owns more than 10 percent of the AMC—
(1) Is determined by the State appraiser certifying and licensing agency not to have good moral character; or
(2) Fails to submit to a background investigation carried out by the State appraiser certifying and licensing agency.