VI. Appendices

A. Key 

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

$3,500

$0

FDIC Expenditure

Dollars in Millions

The FDIC's Strategic Plan and Annual 

Performance Plan provide the basis 

for annual planning and budgeting for 

needed resources. The 2012 aggregate 

budget (for corporate, receivership, 

and investment spending) was $3.3 

billion, while actual expenditures for 

the year were $2.5 billion, about $0.3 

billion less than 2011 expenditures.

Over the past decade, the FDIC’s 

expenditures have varied in response 

to workload. During the last several 

years, expenditures have risen, 

largely due to increasing resolution 

and receivership activity. To a lesser 

extent, increased expenses have 

resulted from supervision-related 

costs associated with the oversight of 

more troubled institutions. 

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

FDIC c tions on Financi al Institutions Applic atio

2012 2011 2010

Deposit Insurance 6 10 16

	 Approved1 6 10 16

	 Denied 0 0 0

New Branches 570 442 46

	 Approved 570 442 459

	 Denied 0 0 2

Mergers 238 206 18

	 Approved 238 206 182

	 Denied 0 0 0

Requests for Consent to Serve2 674 876 83

	 Approved 674 875 839

	 	 Section 19 10 24 10

	 	 Section 32 661 851 829

	 Denied 3 1 0

	 	 Section 19 1 0 0

	 	 Section 32 2 1 0

Notices of Change in Control 26 21 3

	 Letters of Intent Not to Disapprove 26 21 33

	 Disapproved 0 0 0

Brokered Deposit Waivers 97 84 6

Approved 95 83 65

	 Denied 2 1 1

Savings Association Activities3 21 30 

	 Approved 21 30 31

	 Denied 0 0 0

State Bank Activities/Investments4 7 9 

	 Approved 7 9 3

	 Denied 0 0 0

Conversion of Mutual Institutions 8 6 

	 Non-Objection 8 6 2

Objection 0 0 0

1 Includes deposit insurance application filed on behalf of (1) newly organized institutions, (2) existing uninsured financial services companies 

seeking establishment as an insured institution, and (3) interim institutions established to facilitate merger or conversion transactions, and 

applications to facilitate the establishment of thrift holding companies.

2 Under Section 19 of the Federal Deposit Insurance (FDI) Act, an insured institution must receive FDIC approval before employing a person 

convicted of dishonesty or breach of trust. Under Section 32, the FDIC must approve any change of directors or senior executive officers at a 

state nonmember bank that is not in compliance with capital requirements or is otherwise in troubled condition. 

3 Amendments to Part 303 of the FDIC Rules and Regulations changed FDIC oversight responsibility in October 1998. In 1998, Part 303 changed 

the Delegations of Authority to act upon applications. 

4 Section 24 of the FDI Act, in general, precludes a federally insured state bank from engaging in an activity not permissible for a national bank 

and requires notices to be filed with the FDIC.

112 A
Compliance , Enforce ment, nd Oher e lated Le gal

2012 2011 2010

Total Number of Actions Initiated by the FDIC 557 550 758

Termination of Insurance

 Involuntary Termination

Sec. 8a For Violations, Unsafe/Unsound Practices or Conditions

 Voluntary Terminatio

Sec. 8a By Order Upon Request

Sec. 8p No Deposits

Sec. 8q Deposits Assumed

Sec. 8b Cease-and-Desist Action

Notices of Charges Issued1 0 

Orders to Pay Restitution 9 N/A 

Consent Orders 120 183 

Sec. 8e Removal/Prohibition of Director or Offi

Notices of Intention to Remove/Prohibit 8 11

Consent Orders 108 100 

Sec. 8g Suspension/Removal When Charged With Crime 0 

Civil Money Penalties Issued

Sec. 7a Call Report Penalties

Sec. 8i Civil Money Penalties 164 1

Sec. 8i Civil Money Penalty Notices of Assessment

Sec. 10c Orders of Investigation 16 29 1

Sec. 19 Waiver Orde

Approved Section 19 Waiver Orders 119

Denied Section 19 Waiver Orders

Sec. 32 Notices Disapproving Officer/Director’s Request for Review 0

Truth-in-Lending Act Reimbursement Act

Denials of Requests for Relief 0 

Grants of Relief 0 

Banks Making Reimbursement1 126 84

Suspicious Activity Reports (Open and closed institutions)1 139,102 125,460 126,

Other Actions Not Listed 0

1 These actions do not constitute the initiation of a formal enforcement action and, therefore, are not included in the total number of 

actions initiated.

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

Estimated Insured Deposits and the Deposit In

Dece mber 31, 1934, throgh Se ptember 3

Dollars in Millions (except Insurance Coverage

Deposits in Insured 

Institutions2

Insurance Fund as 

a Percentage of

Year

Insurance 

Coverage2

Total Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured

Deposits

Percentage 

of Insured 

Deposits

Deposit 

Insurance

Fund

Total

Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured

Deposits

2012 $250,000 $9,084,802 $7,250,693 79.8 $25,223.9 0.28 0.35

2011 250,000 8,782,165 6,981,569 79.5 11,826.5 0.13 0.17

2010 250,000 7,887,733 6,307,607 80.0 (7,352.2) (0.09) (0.12)

2009 250,000 7,705,353 5,407,773 70.2 (20,861.8) (0.27) (0.39)

2008 100,000 7,505,409 4,750,783 63.3 17,276.3 0.23 0.36

2007 100,000 6,921,678 4,292,211 62.0 52,413.0 0.76 1.22

2006 100,000 6,640,097 4,153,808 62.6 50,165.3 0.76 1.21

2005 100,000 6,229,823 3,891,000 62.5 48,596.6 0.78 1.25

2004 100,000 5,724,775 3,622,213 63.3 47,506.8 0.83 1.31

2003 100,000 5,224,030 3,452,606 66.1 46,022.3 0.88 1.33

2002 100,000 4,916,200 3,383,720 68.8 43,797.0 0.89 1.29

2001 100,000 4,565,068 3,216,585 70.5 41,373.8 0.91 1.29

2000 100,000 4,211,895 3,055,108 72.5 41,733.8 0.99 1.37

1999 100,000 3,885,826 2,869,208 73.8 39,694.9 1.02 1.38

1998 100,000 3,817,150 2,850,452 74.7 39,452.1 1.03 1.38

1997 100,000 3,602,189 2,746,477 76.2 37,660.8 1.05 1.37

1996 100,000 3,454,556 2,690,439 77.9 35,742.8 1.03 1.33

1995 100,000 3,318,595 2,663,873 80.3 28,811.5 0.87 1.08

1994 100,000 3,184,410 2,588,619 81.3 23,784.5 0.75 0.92

1993 100,000 3,220,302 2,602,781 80.8 14,277.3 0.44 0.55

1992 100,000 3,275,530 2,677,709 81.7 178.4 0.01 0.01

1991 100,000 3,331,312 2,733,387 82.1 (6,934.0) (0.21) (0.25)

1990 100,000 3,415,464 2,784,838 81.5 4,062.7 0.12 0.15

1989 100,000 3,412,503 2,755,471 80.7 13,209.5 0.39 0.48

1988 100,000 2,337,080 1,756,771 75.2 14,061.1 0.60 0.80

1987 100,000 2,198,648 1,657,291 75.4 18,301.8 0.83 1.10

1986 100,000 2,162,687 1,636,915 75.7 18,253.3 0.84 1.12

1985 100,000 1,975,030 1,510,496 76.5 17,956.9 0.91 1.19

1984 100,000 1,805,334 1,393,421 77.2 16,529.4 0.92 1.19

1983 100,000 1,690,576 1,268,332 75.0 15,429.1 0.91 1.22

1982 100,000 1,544,697 1,134,221 73.4 13,770.9 0.89 1.21

1981 100,000 1,409,322 988,898 70.2 12,246.1 0.87 1.24

1980 100,000 1,324,463 948,717 71.6 11,019.5 0.83 1.16

1979 40,000 1,226,943 808,555 65.9 9,792.7 0.80 1.21

1978 40,000 1,145,835 760,706 66.4 8,796.0 0.77 1.16

114 A
Estimated Insured Deposits and the Deposit In

Dece mber 31, 1934, throgh Se ptember 30, 20121 (co

Dollars in Millions (except Insurance Coverage

Deposits in Insured 

Institutions2

Insurance Fund as 

a Percentage of

Year

Insurance 

Coverage2

Total Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured

Deposits

Percentage 

of Insured 

Deposits

Deposit 

Insurance

Fund

Total

Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured

Deposits

1977 40,000 1,050,435 692,533 65.9 7,992.8 0.76 1.15

1976 40,000 941,923 628,263 66.7 7,268.8 0.77 1.16

1975 40,000 875,985 569,101 65.0 6,716.0 0.77 1.18

1974 40,000 833,277 520,309 62.4 6,124.2 0.73 1.18

1973 20,000 766,509 465,600 60.7 5,615.3 0.73 1.21

1972 20,000 697,480 419,756 60.2 5,158.7 0.74 1.23

1971 20,000 610,685 374,568 61.3 4,739.9 0.78 1.27

1970 20,000 545,198 349,581 64.1 4,379.6 0.80 1.25

1969 20,000 495,858 313,085 63.1 4,051.1 0.82 1.29

1968 15,000 491,513 296,701 60.4 3,749.2 0.76 1.26

1967 15,000 448,709 261,149 58.2 3,485.5 0.78 1.33

1966 15,000 401,096 234,150 58.4 3,252.0 0.81 1.39

1965 10,000 377,400 209,690 55.6 3,036.3 0.80 1.45

1964 10,000 348,981 191,787 55.0 2,844.7 0.82 1.48

1963 10,000 313,304 177,381 56.6 2,667.9 0.85 1.50

1962 10,000 297,548 170,210 57.2 2,502.0 0.84 1.47

1961 10,000 281,304 160,309 57.0 2,353.8 0.84 1.47

1960 10,000 260,495 149,684 57.5 2,222.2 0.85 1.48

1959 10,000 247,589 142,131 57.4 2,089.8 0.84 1.47

1958 10,000 242,445 137,698 56.8 1,965.4 0.81 1.43

1957 10,000 225,507 127,055 56.3 1,850.5 0.82 1.46

1956 10,000 219,393 121,008 55.2 1,742.1 0.79 1.44

1955 10,000 212,226 116,380 54.8 1,639.6 0.77 1.41

1954 10,000 203,195 110,973 54.6 1,542.7 0.76 1.39

1953 10,000 193,466 105,610 54.6 1,450.7 0.75 1.37

1952 10,000 188,142 101,841 54.1 1,363.5 0.72 1.34

1951 10,000 178,540 96,713 54.2 1,282.2 0.72 1.33

1950 10,000 167,818 91,359 54.4 1,243.9 0.74 1.36

1949 5,000 156,786 76,589 48.8 1,203.9 0.77 1.57

1948 5,000 153,454 75,320 49.1 1,065.9 0.69 1.42

1947 5,000 154,096 76,254 49.5 1,006.1 0.65 1.32

1946 5,000 148,458 73,759 49.7 1,058.5 0.71 1.44

1945 5,000 157,174 67,021 42.6 929.2 0.59 1.39

1944 5,000 134,662 56,398 41.9 804.3 0.60 1.43

1943 5,000 111,650 48,440 43.4 703.1 0.63 1.45

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

Estimated Insured Deposits and the Deposit In

Dece mber 31, 1934, throgh Se ptember 30, 20121 (co

Dollars in Millions (except Insurance Coverage

Deposits in Insured 

Institutions2

Insurance Fund as 

a Percentage of

Year

Insurance 

Coverage2

Total Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured

Deposits

Percentage 

of Insured 

Deposits

Deposit 

Insurance

Fund

Total

Domestic 

Deposits

Est. Insured

Deposits

1942 5,000 89,869 32,837 36.5 616.9 0.69 1.88

1941 5,000 71,209 28,249 39.7 553.5 0.78 1.96

1940 5,000 65,288 26,638 40.8 496.0 0.76 1.86

1939 5,000 57,485 24,650 42.9 452.7 0.79 1.84

1938 5,000 50,791 23,121 45.5 420.5 0.83 1.82

1937 5,000 48,228 22,557 46.8 383.1 0.79 1.70

1936 5,000 50,281 22,330 44.4 343.4 0.68 1.54

1935 5,000 45,125 20,158 44.7 306.0 0.68 1.52

1934 5,000 40,060 18,075 45.1 291.7 0.73 1.61

1 For 2012, figures are as of September 30, all prior years are as of December 31. Prior to 1989, figures are for the Bank Insurance Fund 

(BIF) only and exclude insured branches of foreign banks. For 1989 to 2005, figures represent sum of the BIF and Savings Association 

Insurance Fund (SAIF) amounts; for 2006 to 2012, figures are for DIF. Amounts for 1989 - 2012 include insured branches of foreign banks. 

Prior to year-end 1991, insured deposits were estimated using percentages determined from June Call and Thrift Financial Reports.

2 The year-end 2008 coverage limit and estimated insured deposits do not reflect the temporary increase to $250,000 then in effect under 

the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) 

made this coverage limit permanent. The year-end 2009 coverage limit and estimated insured deposits reflect the $250,000 coverage 

limit. The Dodd-Frank Act also temporarily provided unlimited coverage for non-interest bearing transaction accounts for two years 

beginning December 31, 2010. Coverage for certain retirement accounts increased to $250,000 in 2006. Initial coverage limit was $2,500 

from January 1 to June 30, 1934.

116 A
Income and Expenses, Deposit Insurance und, from Be ginn

Se ptember 11, 1933, through Dece mber 

Dollars in Million

Income Expenses and Losses

Year Total

Assessment 

Income

Assessment

Credits

Investment

and Other

Effective

Assessment 

Rate1 Total

Provision

for 

Ins. Losses

Admin. 

 and 

Operating 

Expenses2

Interest

& Other Ins. 

Expenses

Funding 

Transfer 

from the 

FSLIC 

Resolution 

Fund

Net Income/

(Loss)

Total $191,227.8 $127,776.5 $11,392.9 $74,844.2 $158,831.1 $126,258.4 $23,134.4 $9,438.3 $139.5 $32,536.2

2012 18,522.3 12,397.2 0.2 6,125.3 0.1013% (2,599.0) (4,222.6) 1,777.5 (153.9) 0 21,121.3

2011 16,342.0 13,499.5 0.9 2,843.4 0.1110% (2,915.4) (4,413.6) 1,625.4 (127.2) 0 19,257.4

2010 13,379.9 13,611.2 0.8 (230.5) 0.1772% 75.0 (847.8) 1,592.6 (669.8) 0 13,304.9

2009 24,706.4 17,865.4 148.0 6,989.0 0.2330% 60,709.0 57,711.8 1,271.1 1,726.1 0 (36,002.6)

2008 7,306.3 4,410.4 1,445.9 4,341.8 0.0418% 44,339.5 41,838.8 1,033.5 1,467.2 0 (37,033.2)

2007 3,196.2 3,730.9 3,088.0 2,553.3 0.0093% 1,090.9 95.0 992.6 3.3 0 2,105.3

2006 2,643.5 31.9 0.0 2,611.6 0.0005% 904.3 (52.1) 950.6 5.8 0 1,739.2

2005 2,420.5 60.9 0.0 2,359.6 0.0010% 809.3 (160.2) 965.7 3.8 0 1,611.2

2004 2,240.3 104.2 0.0 2,136.1 0.0019% 607.6 (353.4) 941.3 19.7 0 1,632.7

2003 2,173.6 94.8 0.0 2,078.8 0.0019% (67.7) (1,010.5) 935.5 7.3 0 2,241.3

2002 2,384.7 107.8 0.0 2,276.9 0.0023% 719.6 (243.0) 945.1 17.5 0 1,665.1

2001 2,730.1 83.2 0.0 2,646.9 0.0019% 3,123.4 2,199.3 887.9 36.2 0 (393.3)

2000 2,570.1 64.3 0.0 2,505.8 0.0016% 945.2 28.0 883.9 33.3 0 1,624.9

1999 2,416.7 48.4 0.0 2,368.3 0.0013% 2,047.0 1,199.7 823.4 23.9 0 369.7

1998 2,584.6 37.0 0.0 2,547.6 0.0010% 817.5 (5.7) 782.6 40.6 0 1,767.1

1997 2,165.5 38.6 0.0 2,126.9 0.0011% 247.3 (505.7) 677.2 75.8 0 1,918.2

1996 7,156.8 5,294.2 0.0 1,862.6 0.1622% 353.6 (417.2) 568.3 202.5 0 6,803.2

1995 5,229.2 3,877.0 0.0 1,352.2 0.1238% 202.2 (354.2) 510.6 45.8 0 5,027.0

1994 7,682.1 6,722.7 0.0 959.4 0.2192% (1,825.1) (2,459.4) 443.2 191.1 0 9,507.2

1993 7,354.5 6,682.0 0.0 672.5 0.2157% (6,744.4) (7,660.4) 418.5 497.5 0 14,098.9

1992 6,479.3 5,758.6 0.0 720.7 0.1815% (596.8) (2,274.7) 614.83 1,063.1 35.4 7,111.5

1991 5,886.5 5,254.0 0.0 632.5 0.1613% 16,925.3 15,496.2 326.1 1,103.0 42.4 (10,996.4)

1990 3,855.3 2,872.3 0.0 983.0 0.0868% 13,059.3 12,133.1 275.6 650.6 56.1 (9,147.9)

1989 3,494.8 1,885.0 0.0 1,609.8 0.0816% 4,352.2 3,811.3 219.9 321.0 5.6 (851.8)

1988 3,347.7 1,773.0 0.0 1,574.7 0.0825% 7,588.4 6,298.3 223.9 1,066.2 0 (4,240.7)

1987 3,319.4 1,696.0 0.0 1,623.4 0.0833% 3,270.9 2,996.9 204.9 69.1 0 48.5

1986 3,260.1 1,516.9 0.0 1,743.2 0.0787% 2,963.7 2,827.7 180.3 (44.3) 0 296.4

1985 3,385.5 1,433.5 0.0 1,952.0 0.0815% 1,957.9 1,569.0 179.2 209.7 0 1,427.6

1984 3,099.5 1,321.5 0.0 1,778.0 0.0800% 1,999.2 1,633.4 151.2 214.6 0 1,100.3

1983 2,628.1 1,214.9 164.0 1,577.2 0.0714% 969.9 675.1 135.7 159.1 0 1,658.2

1982 2,524.6 1,108.9 96.2 1,511.9 0.0769% 999.8 126.4 129.9 743.5 0 1,524.8

1981 2,074.7 1,039.0 117.1 1,152.8 0.0714% 848.1 320.4 127.2 400.5 0 1,226.6

1980 1,310.4 951.9 521.1 879.6 0.0370% 83.6 (38.1) 118.2 3.5 0 1,226.8

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

Income and Expenses, Deposit Insurance und, from Be ginn

Se ptember 11, 1933, through Dece mber 31, 2012 (co

Dollars in Million

Income Expenses and Losses

Year Total

Assessment 

Income

Assessment

Credits

Investment

and Other

Effective

Assessment 

Rate1 Total

Provision

for 

Ins. Losses

Admin. 

 and 

Operating 

Expenses2

Interest

& Other Ins. 

Expenses

Funding 

Transfer 

from the 

FSLIC 

Resolution 

Fund

Net Income/

(Loss)

1979 1,090.4 881.0 524.6 734.0 0.0333% 93.7 (17.2) 106.8 4.1 0 996.7

1978 952.1 810.1 443.1 585.1 0.0385% 148.9 36.5 103.3 9.1 0 803.2

1977 837.8 731.3 411.9 518.4 0.0370% 113.6 20.8 89.3 3.5 0 724.2

1976 764.9 676.1 379.6 468.4 0.0370% 212.3 28.0 180.44 3.9 0 552.6

1975 689.3 641.3 362.4 410.4 0.0357% 97.5 27.6 67.7 2.2 0 591.8

1974 668.1 587.4 285.4 366.1 0.0435% 159.2 97.9 59.2 2.1 0 508.9

1973 561.0 529.4 283.4 315.0 0.0385% 108.2 52.5 54.4 1.3 0 452.8

1972 467.0 468.8 280.3 278.5 0.0333% 65.7 10.1 49.6 6.05 0 401.3

1971 415.3 417.2 241.4 239.5 0.0345% 60.3 13.4 46.9 0.0 0 355.0

1970 382.7 369.3 210.0 223.4 0.0357% 46.0 3.8 42.2 0.0 0 336.7

1969 335.8 364.2 220.2 191.8 0.0333% 34.5 1.0 33.5 0.0 0 301.3

1968 295.0 334.5 202.1 162.6 0.0333% 29.1 0.1 29.0 0.0 0 265.9

1967 263.0 303.1 182.4 142.3 0.0333% 27.3 2.9 24.4 0.0 0 235.7

1966 241.0 284.3 172.6 129.3 0.0323% 19.9 0.1 19.8 0.0 0 221.1

1965 214.6 260.5 158.3 112.4 0.0323% 22.9 5.2 17.7 0.0 0 191.7

1964 197.1 238.2 145.2 104.1 0.0323% 18.4 2.9 15.5 0.0 0 178.7

1963 181.9 220.6 136.4 97.7 0.0313% 15.1 0.7 14.4 0.0 0 166.8

1962 161.1 203.4 126.9 84.6 0.0313% 13.8 0.1 13.7 0.0 0 147.3

1961 147.3 188.9 115.5 73.9 0.0323% 14.8 1.6 13.2 0.0 0 132.5

1960 144.6 180.4 100.8 65.0 0.0370% 12.5 0.1 12.4 0.0 0 132.1

1959 136.5 178.2 99.6 57.9 0.0370% 12.1 0.2 11.9 0.0 0 124.4

1958 126.8 166.8 93.0 53.0 0.0370% 11.6 0.0 11.6 0.0 0 115.2

1957 117.3 159.3 90.2 48.2 0.0357% 9.7 0.1 9.6 0.0 0 107.6

1956 111.9 155.5 87.3 43.7 0.0370% 9.4 0.3 9.1 0.0 0 102.5

1955 105.8 151.5 85.4 39.7 0.0370% 9.0 0.3 8.7 0.0 0 96.8

1954 99.7 144.2 81.8 37.3 0.0357% 7.8 0.1 7.7 0.0 0 91.9

1953 94.2 138.7 78.5 34.0 0.0357% 7.3 0.1 7.2 0.0 0 86.9

1952 88.6 131.0 73.7 31.3 0.0370% 7.8 0.8 7.0 0.0 0 80.8

1951 83.5 124.3 70.0 29.2 0.0370% 6.6 0.0 6.6 0.0 0 76.9

1950 84.8 122.9 68.7 30.6 0.0370% 7.8 1.4 6.4 0.0 0 77.0

1949 151.1 122.7 0.0 28.4 0.0833% 6.4 0.3 6.1 0.0 0 144.7

1948 145.6 119.3 0.0 26.3 0.0833% 7.0 0.7 6.36 0.0 0 138.6

1947 157.5 114.4 0.0 43.1 0.0833% 9.9 0.1 9.8 0.0 0 147.6

1946 130.7 107.0 0.0 23.7 0.0833% 10.0 0.1 9.9 0.0 0 120.7

118 A
Income and Expenses, Deposit Insurance und, from Be ginn

Se ptember 11, 1933, through Dece mber 31, 2012 (co

Dollars in Million

Income Expenses and Losses

Year Total

Assessment 

Income

Assessment

Credits

Investment

and Other

Effective

Assessment 

Rate1 Total

Provision

for 

Ins. Losses

Admin. 

 and 

Operating 

Expenses2

Interest

& Other Ins. 

Expenses

Funding 

Transfer 

from the 

FSLIC 

Resolution 

Fund

Net Income/

(Loss)

1945 121.0 93.7 0.0 27.3 0.0833% 9.4 0.1 9.3 0.0 0 111.6

1944 99.3 80.9 0.0 18.4 0.0833% 9.3 0.1 9.2 0.0 0 90.0

1943 86.6 70.0 0.0 16.6 0.0833% 9.8 0.2 9.6 0.0 0 76.8

1942 69.1 56.5 0.0 12.6 0.0833% 10.1 0.5 9.6 0.0 0 59.0

1941 62.0 51.4 0.0 10.6 0.0833% 10.1 0.6 9.5 0.0 0 51.9

1940 55.9 46.2 0.0 9.7 0.0833% 12.9 3.5 9.4 0.0 0 43.0

1939 51.2 40.7 0.0 10.5 0.0833% 16.4 7.2 9.2 0.0 0 34.8

1938 47.7 38.3 0.0 9.4 0.0833% 11.3 2.5 8.8 0.0 0 36.4

1937 48.2 38.8 0.0 9.4 0.0833% 12.2 3.7 8.5 0.0 0 36.0

1936 43.8 35.6 0.0 8.2 0.0833% 10.9 2.6 8.3 0.0 0 32.9

1935 20.8 11.5 0.0 9.3 0.0833% 11.3 2.8 8.5 0.0 0 9.5

1933-34 7.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 N/A 10.0 0.2 9.8 0.0 0 (3.0)

1 Figures represent only BIF-insured institutions prior to 1990, BIF- and SAIF-insured institutions from 1990 through 2005, and DIF-insured institutions beginning 

in 2006. After 1995, all thrift closings became the responsibility of the FDIC and amounts are reflected in the SAIF. The effective assessment rate is calculated 

from annual assessment income (net of assessment credits), excluding transfers to the Financing Corporation (FICO), Resolution Funding Corporation 

(REFCORP) and FSLIC Resolution Fund, divided by the four quarter average assessment base. The effective rates from 1950 through 1984 varied from the 

statutory rate of 0.0833 percent due to assessment credits provided in those years. The statutory rate increased to 0.12 percent in 1990 and to a minimum 

of 0.15 percent in 1991. The effective rates in 1991 and 1992 varied because the FDIC exercised new authority to increase assessments above the statutory 

minimum rate when needed. Beginning in 1993, the effective rate was based on a risk-related premium system under which institutions paid assessments in 

the range of 0.23 percent to 0.31 percent. In May 1995, the BIF reached the mandatory recapitalization level of 1.25 percent. As a result, BIF assessment 

rates were reduced to a range of 0.04 percent to 0.31 percent of assessable deposits, effective June 1995, and assessments totaling $1.5 billion were refunded 

in September 1995. Assessment rates for the BIF were lowered again to a range of 0 to 0.27 percent of assessable deposits, effective the start of 1996. In 

1996, the SAIF collected a one-time special assessment of $4.5 billion. Subsequently, assessment rates for the SAIF were lowered to the same range as the 

BIF, effective October 1996. This range of rates remained unchanged for both funds through 2006. As part of the implementation of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Reform Act of 2005, assessment rates were increased to a range of 0.05 percent to 0.43 percent of assessable deposits effective at the start of 2007, 

but many institutions received a one-time assessment credit ($4.7 billion in total) to offset the new assessments. For the first quarter of 2009, assessment rates 

were increased to a range of 0.12 to 0.50 percent of assessable deposits. From the second quarter of 2009 through the first quarter of 2011, initial assessment 

rates ranged between 0.12 and 0.45 percent of assessable deposits. Initial rates are subject to further adjustments. Beginning in the second quarter of 2011, 

the assessment base changed to average total consolidated assets less average tangible equity (with certain adjustments for banker’s banks and custodial 

banks), as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. The FDIC implemented a new assessment rate schedule at the same time to conform to the larger assessment 

base. Initial assessment rates were lowered to a range of 0.05 to 0.35 percent of the new base. The annualized assessment rates averaged approximately 

17.6 cents per $100 of assessable deposits for the first quarter of 2011 and 11.1 cents per $100 of the new base for the last three quarters of 2011 (which is 

the figure shown in the table). The effective assessment rate for 2012 was based on full year accrued assessment income, actual assessment base figures for 

the first three quarters of 2012, and an estimate for the assessment base for fourth quarter 2012. On June 30, 2009, a special assessment was imposed on all 

insured banks and thrifts, which amounted in aggregate to approximately $5.4 billion. For 8,106 institutions, with $9.3 trillion in assets, the special assessment 

was 5 basis points of each institution’s assets minus tier one capital; 89 other institutions, with assets of $4.0 trillion, had their special assessment capped at 10 

basis points of their second quarter assessment base.

2 These expenses, which are presented as operating expenses in the Statement of Income and Fund Balance, pertain to the FDIC in its corporate capacity only 

and do not include costs that are charged to the failed bank receiverships that are managed by the FDIC. The receivership expenses are presented as part of 

the “Receivables from Resolutions, net” line on the Balance Sheet. The narrative and graph presented in the “Corporate Planning and Budget” section of this 

report (page 111) show the aggregate (corporate and receivership) expenditures of the FDIC.

3 Includes $210 million for the cumulative effect of an accounting change for certain postretirement benefits (1992).

4 Includes a $106 million net loss on government securities (1976).

5 This amount represents interest and other insurance expenses from 1933 to 1972.

6 Includes the aggregate amount of $81 million of interest paid on capital stock between 1933 and 1948.

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

Number, Assets, Deposits, Losses, and Loss to Funds of 

Taken Over or Cosed Bec ause of Financi al Diffic ultie 

Dollars in Thousand

Year Total Assets Deposits

Estimated 

Receivership 

Loss2

Loss to 

Funds3

Total 748 $393,986,574 $317,501,978 $75,977,702 $81,577,294

1995 2 423,819 414,692 28,192 27,750

1994 2 136,815 127,508 11,472 14,599

1993 10 6,147,962 4,881,461 267,595 65,212

1992 59 44,196,946 34,773,224 3,286,957 3,832,195

1991 144 78,898,904 65,173,122 9,235,906 9,734,202

1990 213 129,662,498 98,963,962 16,062,552 19,257,446

19894 318 134,519,630 113,168,009 47,085,028 48,645,890

1 Beginning in 1989 through July 1, 1995, all thrift closings were the responsibility of the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC). Since the RTC 

was terminated on December 31, 1995, and all assets and liabilities transferred to the FSLIC Resolution Fund (FRF), all the results of the 

thrift closing activity from 1989 through 1995 are now reflected on FRF’s books. Year is the year of failure, not the year of resolution.

2 The estimated losses represent the projected loss at the fund level from receiverships for unreimbursed subrogated claims of the FRF and 

unpaid advances to receiverships from the FRF. 

3 The Loss to Funds represents the total resolution cost of the failed thrifts in the FRF-RTC fund, which includes corporate revenue and 

expense items such as interest expense on Federal Financing Bank debt, interest expense on escrowed funds, and interest revenue on 

advances to receiverships, in addition to the estimated losses for receiverships. 

4 Total for 1989 excludes nine failures of the former FSLIC.

120 A
FDIC-Insured Institutions Closed Duri

Dollars in Thousand

Codes for Bank Class:

NM = State-chartered bank that is not a member 

of the Federal Reserve System 

N = National Bank

SB = Savings Bank

SI = Stock and Mutual 

Savings Bank

SM = State-chartered bank that is a 

member of the Federal Reserve 

System

SA = Savings Association

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets1

Total 

Deposits1

Insured 

Deposit Funding 

and Other 

Disbursements

Estimated 

Loss to 

the DIF2

Date of 

Closing 

 or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming 

Bank and Location

Purchase and Assumption – All Depos

Fort Lee Federal

Savings Bank, FSB

Fort Lee, NJ

SA 882 $48,861 $47,786 $48,938 $18,311 04/20/12 Alma Bank

Astoria, NY

Montgomery Bank & Trust

Ailey, GA

NM 7,153 $153,208 $164,181 $171,459 $75,228 07/06/12 Ameris Bank

Moultrie, GA

Second Federal SLA

of Chicago

Chicago, IL

SA 13,801 $190,891 $171,627 $195,896 $76,851 07/20/12 Hinsdale Bank

& Trust Company

Hinsdale, IL

Whole Bank Purchase and Assumption – All Depo

American Eagle

Savings Bank

Boothwyn, PA

SA 1,467 $19,259 $17,548 $18,730 $7,027 01/20/12 Capital Bank, N.A.

Rockville, MD

Central Florida State Bank

Belleview, FL

NM 2,433 $71,485 $71,080 $71,596 $30,740 01/20/12 CenterState Bank

of Florida, N.A.

Winter Haven, FL

The First State Bank

Stockbridge, GA

NM 32,773 $516,760 $509,065 $509,638 $219,086 01/20/12 Hamilton State Bank

Hoschton, GA

BankEast

Knoxville, TN

SM 7,795 $261,947 $259,571 $249,604 $76,798 01/27/12 U.S. Bank National

Association

Cincinnati, OH

First Guaranty Bank &

Trust of Jacksonville

Jacksonville, FL

NM 10,733 $397,082 $378,309 $371,225 $89,662 01/27/12 CenterState Bank

of Florida, N.A.

Winter Haven, FL

Patriot Bank Minnesota

Forest Lake, MN

NM 4,897 $105,029 $102,833 $100,870 $42,651 01/27/12 First Resource Bank

Savage, MN

Tennessee Commerce

Bank

Franklin, TN

NM 12,437 $1,009,154 $1,037,716 $1,056,017 $374,555 01/27/12 Republic Bank

& Trust Company

Louisville, KY

Charter National Bank

& Trust

Hoffman Estates, IL

N 7,053 $93,894 $89,485 $92,749 $25,974 02/10/12 Barrington Bank

& Trust Company, N.A.

Barrington, IL

SCB Bank

Shelbyville, IN

SA 7,848 $182,561 $171,365 $169,673 $41,513 02/10/12 First Merchants Bank, N.A.

Muncie, IN

Central Bank of Georgia

Ellaville, GA

NM 9,991 $278,860 $266,589 $262,985 $69,584 02/24/12 Ameris Bank

Moultrie, GA

Global Commerce Bank

Doraville, GA

NM 5,006 $143,678 $116,813 $118,373 $33,001 03/02/12 Metro City Bank

Doraville, GA

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

FDIC-Insured Institutions Closed During 2012 (con

Dollars in Thousand

Codes for Bank Class:

NM = State-chartered bank that is not a member 

of the Federal Reserve System 

N = National Bank

SB = Savings Bank

SI = Stock and Mutual 

Savings Bank

SM = State-chartered bank that is a 

member of the Federal Reserve 

System

SA = Savings Association

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets1

Total 

Deposits1

Insured 

Deposit Funding 

and Other 

Disbursements

Estimated 

Loss to 

the DIF2

Date of 

Closing 

 or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming 

Bank and Location

Covenant Bank & Trust

Rock Spring, GA

NM 2,340 $95,725 $90,632 $87,210 $38,847 03/23/12 Stearns Bank, N.A.

St. Cloud, MN

Premier Bank

Wilmette, IL

NM 3,097 $268,703 $198,953 $196,298 $64,177 03/23/12 International Bank

of Chicago

Chicago, IL

Fidelity Bank

Dearborn, MI

NM 22,179 $818,237 $747,640 $713,322 $96,013 03/30/12 The Huntington

National Bank

Columbus, OH

Harvest Bank of Maryland

Gaithersburg, MD

NM 3,174 $163,019 $145,534 $141,811 $28,010 04/27/12 Sonabank

McLean, VA

Inter Savings Bank, FSB

D/B/A InterBank, FSB

Maple Grove, MN

SA 13,528 $463,840 $458,053 $456,244 $120,949 04/27/12 Great Southern Bank

Reeds Spring, MO

Palm Desert

National Bank

Palm Desert, CA

N 2,905 $129,253 $129,023 $123,485 $30,892 04/27/12 Pacific Premier Bank

Costa Mesa, CA

Plantation Federal Bank

Pawleys Island, SC

SA 13,816 $433,512 $415,943 $420,208 $87,831 04/27/12 First Federal Bank

Charleston, SC

Security Bank, National

Association

North Lauderdale, FL

N 2,322 $101,026 $99,067 $99,650 $18,472 05/04/12 Banesco USA

Coral Gables, FL

Alabama Trust Bank,

National Association

Sylacauga, AL

N 2,719 $51,553 $45,149 $44,121 $14,065 05/18/12 Southern States Bank

Anniston, AL

Carolina Federal

Savings Bank

Charleston, SC

SA 3,458 $54,373 $53,082 $54,557 $20,566 06/08/12 Bank of North Carolina

Thomasville, NC

Farmers’ and Traders’

State Bank

Shabbona, IL

NM 3,010 $43,077 $42,302 $39,719 $13,403 06/08/12 First State Bank

Mendota, IL

First Capital Bank

Kingfisher, OK

NM 2,422 $44,448 $44,828 $47,726 $9,883 06/08/12 F & M Bank

Edmond, OK

Waccamaw Bank

Whiteville, NC

SM 22,381 $533,114 $472,704 $462,747 $60,442 06/08/12 First Community Bank

Bluefield, VA

Putnam State Bank

Palatka, FL

NM 8,035 $169,489 $160,024 $156,122 $43,255 06/15/12 Harbor Community Bank

Indiantown, FL

Security Exchange Bank

Marietta, GA

NM 2,832 $150,962 $147,896 $148,018 $42,430 06/15/12 Fidelity Bank

Atlanta, GA

122 A
FDIC-Insured Institutions Closed During 2012 (con

Dollars in Thousand

Codes for Bank Class:

NM = State-chartered bank that is not a member 

of the Federal Reserve System 

N = National Bank

SB = Savings Bank

SI = Stock and Mutual 

Savings Bank

SM = State-chartered bank that is a 

member of the Federal Reserve 

System

SA = Savings Association

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets1

Total 

Deposits1

Insured 

Deposit Funding 

and Other 

Disbursements

Estimated 

Loss to 

the DIF2

Date of 

Closing 

 or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming 

Bank and Location

The Farmers Bank

of Lynchburg

Lynchburg, TN

NM 9,293 $163,859 $156,402 $153,177 $35,720 06/15/12 Clayton Bank and Trust

Knoxville, TN

Glasgow Savings Bank

Glasgow, MO

NM 2,176 $22,341 $21,809 $22,627 $3,081 07/13/12 Regional Missouri Bank

Marceline, MO

First Cherokee State Bank

Woodstock, GA

NM 9,617 $209,021 $182,114 $180,780 $40,998 07/20/12 Community

& Southern Bank

Atlanta, GA

Georgia Trust Bank

Buford, GA

NM 2,404 $116,890 $114,748 $116,810 $24,782 07/20/12 Community

& Southern Bank

Atlanta, GA

Heartland Bank

Leawood, KS

NM 1,965 $96,002 $89,723 $86,811 $7,161 07/20/12 Metcalf Bank

Lees Summit, MO

The Royal Palm Bank

of Florida

Naples, FL

NM 2,303 $78,771 $78,876 $78,836 $16,406 07/20/12 First National Bank

of the Gulf Coast

Naples, FL

Jasper Banking Company

Jasper, GA

NM 10,984 $206,672 $204,238 $198,872 $62,319 07/27/12 Stearns Bank, N.A

St. Cloud, MN

Waukegan Savings Bank

Waukegan, IL

SB 5,737 $83,679 $73,001 $73,716 $22,435 08/03/12 First Midwest Bank

Itasca, IL

First Commerical Bank

Bloomington, MN

NM 3,642 $215,867 $206,809 $198,028 $65,923 09/07/12 Republic Bank

& Trust Company

Louisville, KY

Truman Bank

St. Louis, MO

SM 9,526 $282,338 $245,716 $237,573 $36,710 09/14/12 Simmons First

National Bank

Pine Bluff, AR

First United Bank

Crete, IL

NM 23,002 $328,422 $316,877 $321,680 $50,686 09/28/12 Old Plank Trail

Community Bank, N.A.

New Lenox, IL

Excel Bank

Sedalia, MO

NM 10,023 $186,113 $173,670 $170,087 $44,297 10/19/12 Simmons First

National Bank

Pine Bluff, AR

First East Side

Savings Bank

Tamarac, FL

SA 1,242 $65,686 $64,888 $66,403 $12,348 10/19/12 Stearns Bank, N.A.

St. Cloud, MN

GulfSouth Private Bank

Destin, FL

NM 1,896 $139,391 $131,579 $128,540 $38,932 10/19/12 SmartBank

Pigeon Forge, TN

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

FDIC-Insured Institutions Closed During 2012 (con

Dollars in Thousand

Codes for Bank Class:

NM = State-chartered bank that is not a member 

of the Federal Reserve System 

N = National Bank

SB = Savings Bank

SI = Stock and Mutual 

Savings Bank

SM = State-chartered bank that is a 

member of the Federal Reserve 

System

SA = Savings Association

Name and Location

Bank 

Class

Number 

of 

Deposit 

Accounts

Total 

Assets1

Total 

Deposits1

Insured 

Deposit Funding 

and Other 

Disbursements

Estimated 

Loss to 

the DIF2

Date of 

Closing 

 or 

Acquisition

Receiver/Assuming 

Bank and Location

Citizens First

National Bank

Princeton, IL

N 59,696 $923,959 $869,440 $840,261 $47,650 11/02/12 Heartland Bank

& Trust Company

Bloomington, IL

Heritage Bank of Florida

Lutz, FL

NM 6,664 $225,477 $223,309 $220,586 $67,786 11/02/12 Centennial Bank

Conway, AR

Hometown Community

Bank

Braselton, GA

NM 3,158 $124,561 $108,931 $105,207 $39,125 11/16/12 CertusBank, N.A.

Easley, SC

Community Bank

of the Ozarks

Sunrise Beach, MO

NM 2,864 $42,816 $41,881 $40,247 $12,415 12/14/12 Bank of Sullivan

Sullivan, MO

Insured Deposit Transfer/Purchase & Assumpti

Bank of the Eastern Shore

Cambridge, MD

SM 9,691 $162,460 $150,951 $166,270 $52,968 04/27/12 Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation

Insured Deposit Payof

Home Savings of America

Little Falls, MN

SA 12,025 $434,111 $432,223 $481,476 $83,646 02/24/12 Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation

New City Bank

Chicago, IL

NM 850 $71,202 $72,399 $78,269 $20,082 03/09/12 Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation

Nova Bank

Berwyn, PA

SB 12,390 $444,710 $395,248 $439,261 $91,238 10/26/12 Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation

1 Total Assets and Total Deposits data are based upon the last Call Report filed by the institution prior to failure.

2 Estimated losses are as of 12/31/12. Estimated losses are routinely adjusted with updated information from new appraisals and asset sales, 

which ultimately affect the asset values and projected recoveries. Represents the estimated loss to the DIF from deposit insurance obligations. 

This amount does not include the estimated loss allocable to the Transaction Account Guarantee and Debt Guarantee Program claims.

124 A
Recoverie s and Losses by the Deposit Insurance Fund

for the Protec tion of Depositors, 193

Dollars in Thousand

Bank and Thrift Failures1

Year2

Number 

of Banks/

Thrifts

Total 

Assets3

Total 

Deposits3

Insured Deposit 

Funding 

and Other 

Disbursements Recoveries

Estimated 

Additional 

Recoveries

Estimated 

Losses

2,560 $925,620,900 $695,536,729 $572,325,121 $395,365,464 $54,971,765 $121,987,892

2012 51 11,617,348 11,009,630 11,034,508 499,565 7,788,019 2,746,924

2011 92 34,922,997 31,071,862 31,686,966 2,230,090 20,693,288 8,763,588

20104 157 92,084,987 78,290,185 82,210,860 50,082,606 10,796,927 21,331,327

20094 140 169,709,160 137,783,121 135,926,307 86,969,627 12,869,470 36,087,210

20084 25 371,945,480 234,321,715 205,447,245 183,261,881 2,279,073 19,906,291

2007 3 2,614,928 2,424,187 1,917,998 1,369,413 322,914 225,671

2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2004 4 170,099 156,733 138,926 134,978 31 3,917

2003 3 947,317 901,978 883,772 812,933 8,192 62,647

2002 11 2,872,720 2,512,834 2,127,047 1,704,030 7,556 415,461

2001 4 1,821,760 1,661,214 1,605,249 1,128,577 184,367 292,305

2000 7 410,160 342,584 297,313 265,175 0 32,138

1999 8 1,592,189 1,320,573 1,307,260 711,758 5,583 589,919

1998 3 290,238 260,675 292,691 58,248 11,644 222,799

1997 1 27,923 27,511 25,546 20,520 0 5,026

1996 6 232,634 230,390 201,533 140,918 0 60,615

1995 6 802,124 776,387 609,043 524,571 0 84,472

1994 13 1,463,874 1,397,018 1,224,769 1,045,718 0 179,051

1993 41 3,828,939 3,509,341 3,841,658 3,209,012 0 632,646

1992 120 45,357,237 39,921,310 14,541,102 10,866,760 309 3,674,033

1991 124 64,556,512 52,972,034 21,499,326 15,500,130 4,392 5,994,804

1990 168 16,923,462 15,124,454 10,812,484 8,040,995 0 2,771,489

1989 206 28,930,572 24,152,468 11,443,281 5,247,995 0 6,195,286

1988 200 38,402,475 26,524,014 10,432,655 5,055,158 0 5,377,497

1987 184 6,928,889 6,599,180 4,876,994 3,014,502 0 1,862,492

1986 138 7,356,544 6,638,903 4,632,121 2,949,583 0 1,682,538

1985 116 3,090,897 2,889,801 2,154,955 1,506,776 0 648,179

1984 78 2,962,179 2,665,797 2,165,036 1,641,157 0 523,879

1983 44 3,580,132 2,832,184 3,042,392 1,973,037 0 1,069,355

1982 32 1,213,316 1,056,483 545,612 419,825 0 125,787

1981 7 108,749 100,154 114,944 105,956 0 8,988

1980 10 239,316 219,890 152,355 121,675 0 30,680

1934 - 1979 558 8,615,743 5,842,119 5,133,173 4,752,295 0 380,878

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

Recoverie s and Losses by the Deposit Insurance Fund

for the Protec tion of Depositors, 1934 – 2012 (co

Dollars in Thousand

Assistance Transactions

Year2

Number 

of Banks/

Thrifts

Total 

Assets3

Total 

Deposits3

Insured Deposit 

Funding 

and Other 

Disbursements Recoveries

Estimated 

Additional 

Recoveries

Estimated 

Losses

154 $3,317,099,253 $1,442,173,417 $11,630,356 $6,199,875 $0 $5,430,481

2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

20095 8 1,917,482,183 1,090,318,282 0 0 0 0

20085 5 1,306,041,994 280,806,966 0 0 0 0

2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2004 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1998 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1993 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1992 2 33,831 33,117 1,486 1,236 0 250

1991 3 78,524 75,720 6,117 3,093 0 3,024

1990 1 14,206 14,628 4,935 2,597 0 2,338

1989 1 4,438 6,396 2,548 252 0 2,296

1988 80 15,493,939 11,793,702 1,730,351 189,709 0 1,540,642

1987 19 2,478,124 2,275,642 160,877 713 0 160,164

1986 7 712,558 585,248 158,848 65,669 0 93,179

1985 4 5,886,381 5,580,359 765,732 406,676 0 359,056

1984 2 40,470,332 29,088,247 5,531,179 4,414,904 0 1,116,275

1983 4 3,611,549 3,011,406 764,690 427,007 0 337,683

126 A
Recoverie s and Losses by the Deposit Insurance Fund

for the Protec tion of Depositors, 1934 – 2012 (co

Dollars in Thousand

Assistance Transactions

Year2

Number 

of Banks/

Thrifts

Total 

Assets3

Total 

Deposits3

Insured Deposit 

Funding 

and Other 

Disbursements Recoveries

Estimated 

Additional 

Recoveries

Estimated 

Losses

1982 10 10,509,286 9,118,382 1,729,538 686,754 0 1,042,784

1981 3 4,838,612 3,914,268 774,055 1,265 0 772,790

1980 1 7,953,042 5,001,755 0 0 0 0

1934 - 1979 4 1,490,254 549,299 0 0 0 0

1 Institutions closed by the FDIC, including deposit payoff, insured deposit transfer, and deposit assumption cases.

2 For 1990 through 2005, amounts represent the sum of BIF and SAIF failures (excluding those handled by the RTC); prior to 1990, figures are only 

for the BIF. After 1995, all thrift closings became the responsibility of the FDIC and amounts are reflected in the SAIF. For 2006 to 2012, figures 

are for the DIF.

3 Assets and deposit data are based on the last Call Report or TFR filed before failure.

4 Includes amounts related to transaction account coverage under the Transaction Account Guarantee Program (TAG). The estimated losses as of 

12/31/10 for TAG accounts in 2010, 2009, and 2008 are $519 million, $1,526 million, and $15 million, respectively.

5 Includes institutions where assistance was provided under a systemic risk determination. Any costs that exceed the amounts estimated under the 

least cost resolution requirement would be recovered through a special assessment on all FDIC-insured institutions.

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

B. MoreAb out th

FDIC Board of Dire

Martin J. Gruenberg 

Martin J. Gruenberg is the 20th Chairman of 

the FDIC, receiving Senate confirmation on 

November 15, 2012, for a five-year term. Mr. 

Gruenberg has served on the FDIC Board of 

Directors since August 22, 2005, including 

as Acting Chairman from July 9, 2011, to 

November 15, 2012, and also from November 

16, 2005, to June 26, 2006.

Mr. Gruenberg joined the FDIC Board after 

broad congressional experience in the 

financial services and regulatory areas. 

He served as Senior Counsel to Senator 

Paul S. Sarbanes (D-MD) on the staff of the 

Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, 

and Urban Affairs from 1993 to 2005. 

Mr. Gruenberg advised the Senator on issues 

of domestic and international financial 

regulation, monetary policy, and trade. He 

also served as Staff Director of the Banking 

Committee’s Subcommittee on International 

Finance and Monetary Policy, from 1987 

to 1992. Major legislation in which Mr. 

Gruenberg played an active role during 

his service on the Committee includes the 

Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, 

and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA); 

the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 

Improvement Act of 1991 (FDICIA); the 

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act; and the SarbanesOxley Act of 2002.

Mr. Gruenberg served as Chairman of the 

Executive Council and President of the 

International Association of Deposit 

Insurers (IADI) from November 2007 to 

November 2012.

Seated (left to right): 

Thomas M. Hoenig, 

Martin J. Gruenberg, 

Jeremiah O. Norton 

Standing (left to 

right): Thomas J. 

Curry, Richard Cordray

128 A
Mr. Gruenberg holds a J.D. from Case 

Western Reserve Law School and 

an A.B. from Princeton University, 

Woodrow Wilson School of Public 

and International Affairs. 

Thomas M. Hoenig

Thomas M. Hoenig was confirmed 

by the Senate as Vice Chairman of 

the FDIC on November 15, 2012. He 

joined the FDIC on April 16, 2012, as 

a member of the Board of Directors 

of the FDIC for a six-year term. He is 

also a member of the Executive Board 

of the International Association of 

Deposit Insurers.

Prior to serving on the FDIC Board, 

Mr. Hoenig was the President of the 

Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City 

and a member of the Federal Reserve 

System’s Federal Open Market 

Committee from 1991 to 2011.

Mr. Hoenig was with the Federal 

Reserve for 38 years, beginning as an 

economist, and then as a senior officer 

in banking supervision during the 

U.S. banking crisis of the 1980s. In 

1986, he led the Kansas City Federal 

Reserve Bank’s Division of Bank 

Supervision and Structure, directing 

the oversight of more than 1,000 banks 

and bank holding companies with 

assets ranging from less than $100 

million to $20 billion. He became 

President of the Kansas City Federal 

Reserve Bank on October 1, 1991.

Mr. Hoenig is a native of Fort Madison, 

Iowa, and received a doctorate in 

economics from Iowa State University.

Jeremiah O. Norton

Jeremiah O. Norton was sworn in 

on April 16, 2012, as a member of 

the FDIC Board of Directors for 

the remainder of a term expiring 

July 15, 2013.

Prior to joining the FDIC’s Board, Mr. 

Norton was an Executive Director at 

J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, in New 

York, NY.

Mr. Norton was in government for 

a number of years before joining 

the FDIC Board, most recently as 

the Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Financial Institutions Policy at the 

U.S. Treasury Department. Mr. Norton 

also was a Legislative Assistant and 

professional staff member for U.S. 

Representative Edward R. Royce.

Mr. Norton received a J.D. from the 

Georgetown University Law Center 

and an A.B. in economics from Duke 

University.

Thomas J. Curry

Thomas J. Curry was sworn in as the 

30th Comptroller of the Currency on 

April 9, 2012. The Comptroller of 

the Currency is the administrator of 

national banks and federal savings 

associations, and chief officer of 

the Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency (OCC). The OCC supervises 

more than 2,000 national banks and 

federal savings associations and about 

50 federal branches and agencies 

of foreign banks in the United 

States. These institutions comprise 

nearly two-thirds of the assets of the 

commercial banking system. The 

Comptroller also is a Director of 

NeighborWorks® America.

Prior to becoming Comptroller of 

the Currency, Mr. Curry served as 

a Director of the FDIC Board since 

January 2004, and as the Chairman of 

the NeighborWorks® America Board of 

Directors.

Prior to joining the FDIC’s Board 

of Directors, Mr. Curry served five 

Massachusetts Governors as the 

Commonwealth’s Commissioner of 

Banks from 1990 to 1991 and from 

1995 to 2003. He served as Acting 

Commissioner from February 1994 

to June 1995. He previously served 

as First Deputy Commissioner and 

Assistant General Counsel within the 

Massachusetts Division of Banks. He 

entered state government in 1982 as 

an attorney with the Massachusetts’

Secretary of State’s Office.

Mr. Curry served as the Chairman 

of the Conference of State Bank 

Supervisors from 2000 to 2001, and 

served two terms on the State Liaison 

Committee of the Federal Financial 

Institutions Examination Council, 

including a term as Committee 

Chairman.

He is a graduate of Manhattan College 

(summa cum laude), where he was 

elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He 

received his law degree from the New 

England School of Law. 

Richard Cordray 

Richard Cordray serves as the first 

Director of the Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau. He previously led 

the Bureau’s Enforcement Division.

Prior to joining the Bureau, Mr. 

Cordray served on the front lines 

of consumer protection as Ohio’s 

Attorney General. Mr. Cordray 

recovered more than $2 billion 

for Ohio’s retirees, investors, and 

business owners, and took major 

steps to help protect its consumers 

from fraudulent foreclosures and 

financial predators. In 2010, his office 

responded to a record number of 

consumer complaints, but Mr. Cordray 

went further and opened that process 

for the first time to small businesses 

and nonprofit organizations to ensure 

protections for even more Ohioans. 

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

To recognize his work on behalf of 

consumers as Attorney General, the 

Better Business Bureau presented Mr. 

Cordray with an award for promoting 

an ethical marketplace.

Mr. Cordray also served as Ohio 

Treasurer and Franklin County 

Treasurer, two elected positions in 

which he led state and county banking, 

investment, debt, and financing 

activities. As Ohio Treasurer, he 

resurrected a defunct economic 

development program that provides 

low-interest loan assistance to small 

businesses to create jobs, re-launched 

the original concept as GrowNOW, 

and pumped hundreds of millions 

of dollars into access for credit 

to small businesses. Mr. Cordray 

simultaneously created a Bankers 

Advisory Council to share ideas about 

the program with community bankers 

across Ohio.

Earlier in his career, Mr. Cordray was 

an adjunct professor at the Ohio State 

University College of Law, served as 

a State Representative for the 33rd 

Ohio House District, was the first 

Solicitor General in Ohio’s history, and 

was a sole practitioner and Counsel 

to Kirkland & Ellis. Mr. Cordray has 

argued seven cases before the United 

States Supreme Court, by special 

appointment of both the Clinton and 

Bush Justice Departments. He is a 

graduate of Michigan State University, 

Oxford University, and the University 

of Chicago Law School. Mr. Cordray 

was Editor-in-Chief of the University 

of Chicago Law Review and later 

clerked for U.S. Supreme Court 

Justices Byron White and Anthony 

Kennedy.

Mr. Cordray lives in Grove City, Ohio, 

with his wife Peggy—a Professor 

at Capital University Law School in 

Columbus—and twin children Danny 

and Holly.

130 A
FDIC Organi z

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Martin J. Gruenberg

FDIC

Chairman

Jeremiah O. Norton

FDIC

Board Member

Thomas M. Hoenig

FDIC

Vice Chairman, Board Member

Thomas J. Curry

OCC

Board Member

Richard Cordray

CFPB

Board Member

WRITER-EDITOR

DEPUTY TO THE CHAIRMAN

CHIEF OF STAFF

Barbara A. Ryan

DEPUTY TO THE CHAIRMAN 

AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Steven O. App

SENIOR ADVISOR

INTERNATIONAL RESOLUTION POLICY

David S. Hoelscher

OFFICE OF 

COMMUNICATIONS

OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Fred S. Carns

CHIEF RISK OFFICER

Stephen A. Quick

OFFICE OF MINORITY AND 

WOMEN INCLUSION

D. Michael Collins

Director

OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS

Eric J. Spitler

Director

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

Cottrell L. Webster

Director SENIOR ADVISOR

Ellen Lazar

Michele A. Heller

SPECIAL ADVISOR

FOR SUPERVISORY MATTERS

John D. Weier

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Jon T. Rymer

INTERNAL OMBUDSMAN

Robert D. Harris

DEPUTY TO THE CHAIRMAN

FOR COMMUNICATIONS

Andrew S. Gray Kymberly K. Copa

CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER AND 

CHIEF PRIVACY OFFICER

Russell G. Pittman

DIVISION OF RESOLUTIONS 

& RECEIVERSHIPS

Bret D. Edwards

Director

LEGAL DIVISION

Richard J. Osterman, Jr.

Acting Genral Counsel

DIVISION OF INSURANCE 

AND RESEARCH

Arthur J. Murton

Director

DIVISION OF DEPOSITOR 

AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

Mark E. Pearce

Director

OFFICE OF COMPLEX

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

James R. Wigand

Director

DIVISION OF RISK 

MANAGEMENT SUPERVISION

Doreen R. Eberley

Director

DIVISION OF 

ADMINISTRATION

Arleas Upton Kea

Director

DIVISION OF FINANCE

Craig R. Jarvill

Director

DIVISION OF INFORMATION 

TECHOLOGY

Russell G. Pittman

Director

CORPORATE UNIVERSITY

Thom H. Terwilliger

Director

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

FDIC Year–End Staffing

5,311 5,078 4,514 4,476 4,532 4,988 6,557 8,150 7,973 7,476

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

9,000

6,000

3,000

0

Cor

Staffing Tren

Note: 2008-2012 staffing totals reflect year-end full time equivalent staff. Prior to 2008, staffing totals reflect total emplyees on-board.

132 A
Number of Employee s by Division/Office 2011 and

Total Washington Regional/Field

Division or Office: 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011

Division of Risk Management Supervision 2,763 2,900 169 168 2,593 2,732

Division of Depositor and Consumer Protection 848 819 119 95 729 724

Division of Resolutions and Receiverships 1,428 1,811 165 139 1,263 1,672

Legal Division 716 774 384 354 332 4

Division of Administration 403 431 248 243 156 188

Division of Information Technology 358 354 280 271 78 83

Corporate University 194 176 176 163 18 13

Division of Insurance and Research 195 185 145 134 51 

Division of Finance2 176 177 174 172 2 5

Office of Inspector General 126 117 81 77 46

Office of Complex Financial Institutions 148 115 87 64 61 51

Executive Offices3 20 20 20 20 0 0

Executive Support Offices 4 102 94 89 77 13 17

Total 7,476 7,973 2,135 1,977 5,341 5,996

1 The FDIC reports staffing totals using a full-time equivalent (FTE) methodology, which is based on an employee’s scheduled work hours. 

Division/Office staffing has been rounded to the nearest whole FTE. Totals may not foot due to rounding.

2 On January 1, 2012 the Office of the Enterprise Risk Management was merged into the Division of Finance.

3 Includes the Offices of the Chairman, Vice Chairman, Director (Appointive), Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and 

External Affairs.

4 Includes the Offices of the Legislative Affairs, Communications, International Affairs, Ombudsman, Minority and Women Inclusion, and 

Corporate Risk Management.

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

Sources of Infor

FDIC Website

www.fdic.gov

A wide range of banking, consumer, 

and financial information is available 

on the FDIC’s website. This includes 

the FDIC’s Electronic Deposit 

Insurance Estimator (EDIE), which 

estimates an individual’s deposit 

insurance coverage; the Institution 

Directory, which contains financial 

profiles of FDIC-insured institutions; 

Community Reinvestment Act 

evaluations and ratings for institutions 

supervised by the FDIC; Call Reports, 

which are banks’ reports of condition 

and income; and Money Smart, a 

training program to help individuals 

outside the financial mainstream 

enhance their money management 

skills and create positive banking 

relationships. Readers also can 

access a variety of consumer 

pamphlets, FDIC press releases, 

speeches, and other updates on 

the agency’s activities, as well as 

corporate databases and customized 

reports of FDIC and banking industry 

information. 

FDIC Call Center

Phone: 877-275-3342 (877-ASK-FDIC)

703-562-2222 

Hearing Impaired: 800-925-4618

703-562-2289

The FDIC Call Center in Washington, 

DC, is the primary telephone point 

of contact for general questions from 

the banking community, the public, 

and FDIC employees. The Call 

Center directly, or in concert with 

other FDIC subject-matter experts, 

responds to questions about deposit 

insurance and other consumer issues 

and concerns, as well as questions 

about FDIC programs and activities. 

The Call Center also refers callers 

to other federal and state agencies 

as needed. Hours of operation are 

8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Eastern Time, 

Monday – Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 

p.m., Saturday – Sunday. Recorded 

information about deposit insurance 

and other topics is available 24 hours a 

day at the same telephone number.

As a customer service, the FDIC Call 

Center has many bilingual Spanish 

agents on staff and has access to a 

translation service able to assist with 

over 40 different languages.

Public Information Center 

3501 Fairfax Drive 

Room E-1021 

Arlington, VA 22226

Phone: 877-275-3342 (877-ASK-FDIC),

703-562-2200

Fax: 703-562-2296

FDIC Online Catalog:

https://vcart.velocitypayment.com/

fdic/

E-mail: publicinfo@fdic.gov

Publications such as FDIC Quarterly 

and Consumer News, and a 

variety of deposit insurance and 

consumer pamphlets are available 

at www.fdic.gov or may be ordered in 

hard copy through the FDIC online 

catalog. Other information, press 

releases, speeches and congressional 

testimony, directives to financial 

institutions, policy manuals, and 

FDIC documents are available 

on request through the Public 

Information Center. Hours of 

operation are 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., 

Eastern Time, Monday – Friday.

Office of the Ombudsman

3501 Fairfax Drive 

Room E-2022 

Arlington, VA 22226

Phone: 877-275-3342 (877-ASK-FDIC) 

Fax: 703-562-6057

E-mail: ombudsman@fdic.gov

The Office of the Ombudsman (OO) 

is an independent, neutral, and 

confidential resource and liaison for 

the banking industry and the general 

public. The OO responds to inquiries 

about the FDIC in a fair, impartial, 

and timely manner. It researches 

questions and fields complaints from 

bankers and bank customers. OO 

representatives are present at all 

bank closings to provide accurate 

information to bank customers, 

the media, bank employees, and 

the general public. The OO also 

recommends ways to improve FDIC 

operations, regulations, and customer 

service.

134 A
Regional and Ae

Atlanta Regional Off

10 Tenth Street, NE

Suite 800 

Atlanta, Georgia 30309 

(678) 916-2200

Alabama

Florida

Georgia

North Carolina

South Carolina

Virginia

West Virginia

Chicago Regional Offi

300 South Riverside Plaza 

Suite 1700 

Chicago, Illinois 60606

(312) 382-6000

Illinois

Indiana

Kentucky

Michigan

Ohio

Wisconsin

Dallas Regional Offi

1601 Bryan Street 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

(214) 754-0098 

Colorado

New Mexico

Oklahoma

Texas

Memphis Area Office

6060 Primacy Parkway 

Suite 300 

Memphis, Tennessee 38119 

(901) 685-1603

Arkansas

Louisiana

Mississippi

Tennessee 

Kansas City Regional Off

1100 Walnut Street 

Suite 2100 

Kansas City, Missouri 64106 

(816) 234-8000

Iowa

Kansas

Minnesota

Missouri

Nebraska

North Dakota

South Dakota

New York Regional Of

350 Fifth Avenue 

Suite 1200 

New York, New York 10118 

(917) 320-2500

Delaware

District of Columbia

Maryland

New Jersey

New York

Pennsylvania

Puerto Rico

Virgin Islands

Boston Area Office

15 Braintree Hill Office Park 

Suite 100 

Braintree, Massachusetts 02184 

(781) 794-5500

Connecticut

Maine

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

Rhode Island

Vermont

San Francisco Regional Offi

25 Jessie Street at Ecker Square 

Suite 2300 

San Francisco, California 94105 

(415) 546-0160

Alaska

Arizona

California

Guam

Hawaii

Idaho

Montana

Nevada

Oregon

Utah 

Washington

Wyoming

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

C. ffic e of In

General’ Ass 

of the Manage

and Performa

Challenges Faci 

the FDI

Under the Reports Consolidation 

Act of 2000, the Office of Inspector 

General (OIG) is required to identify 

the most significant management 

and performance challenges facing 

the Corporation and provide its 

assessment to the Corporation 

for inclusion in the FDIC’s annual 

performance and accountability 

report. The OIG conducts this 

assessment annually and identifies 

specific areas of challenge facing the 

Corporation at the time. In doing so, 

we keep in mind the Corporation’s 

overall program and operational 

responsibilities; financial industry, 

economic, and technological 

conditions and trends; areas of 

congressional interest and concern; 

relevant laws and regulations; 

the Chairman’s priorities and 

corresponding corporate goals; and 

ongoing activities to address the issues 

involved. In looking at the recent 

past and the current environment 

and anticipating—to the extent 

possible—what the future holds, the 

OIG believes that the FDIC faces 

challenges in the areas listed below. 

Implementing New Systemic 

Resolution Responsibilities

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform 

and Consumer Protection Act 

(Dodd-Frank Act) has given the FDIC 

significant new authorities to help 

address the risks in systemically 

important financial companies or 

institutions (SIFIs). The FDIC’s Office 

of Complex Financial Institutions 

(OCFI) is focusing on three areas to 

carry out its new responsibilities: 

monitoring risk within and across 

these large, complex firms from the 

standpoint of resolution; conducting 

resolution planning and developing 

strategies to respond to potential 

crisis situations; and coordinating 

with regulators overseas regarding the 

significant challenges associated with 

cross-border resolution. 

Importantly, under Title I of the 

Dodd-Frank Act, bank holding 

companies with more than $50 billion 

in assets and other firms designated 

as systemic must develop their own 

resolution plans or “living wills.” The 

firms must show how they could 

be resolved under the bankruptcy 

code without disrupting the financial 

system and the economy. The first 

resolution plans were submitted in 

early July 2012 by the nine largest 

companies with nonbank assets of 

over $250 billion. The FDIC and the 

Federal Reserve Board are reviewing 

those plans for completeness and 

compliance with related rulemaking 

requirements. 

OCFI has also been developing its own 

resolution plans to be ready to resolve 

a failing systemic financial company. 

These internal FDIC resolution plans 

apply many of the same powers that 

the FDIC has long used to manage 

failed-bank receiverships to a failing 

SIFI. If the FDIC is appointed as 

receiver of such an institution, it will 

face the challenge of carrying out an 

orderly liquidation in a manner that 

maximizes the value of the company’s 

assets and ensures that creditors 

and shareholders appropriately 

bear any losses. The goal is to close 

the institution without putting the 

financial system at risk. 

The coming months will continue to 

be challenging for the FDIC and all 

of the regulatory agencies as they 

continue to carry out the mandates 

of the Dodd-Frank Act, develop rules 

to implement key sections, and fulfill 

their responsibilities as members 

of the Financial Stability Oversight 

Council (FSOC). With respect to 

the FDIC’s OCFI, in particular, it will 

need to ensure that it has the needed 

expertise and resources to build its 

capabilities, integrate its operations 

and systems within the FDIC’s 

infrastructure and established control 

environment, and supplement existing 

controls, as warranted, to ensure the 

success of the FDIC’s activities with 

respect to SIFIs. This is especially 

important, given the significance of 

OCFI’s responsibilities, the sensitivity 

of the information it is handling, 

and the potential consequences of 

any unauthorized disclosure of such 

information. 

Resolving Failed Institutions 

and Managing Receiverships

The Corporation continues to handle a 

demanding resolution and receivership 

workload. From 2008 through 2012, 

465 institutions failed with total assets 

(as of their final Call Reports) of $680 

billion. Estimated losses resulting 

from the failures total approximately 

$86.8 billion. As of December 31, 

2012, the number of institutions on 

the FDIC’s “Problem List” was 651, 

indicating the potential of more 

failures to come, albeit with far less 

frequency, and an increased asset 

disposition workload. Total assets of 

problem institutions were $233 billion 

as of year-end 2012. 

The FDIC frequently enters into 

shared-loss agreements (SLAs) with 

acquiring institutions (AIs) of failed 

bank assets. These agreements 

guarantee that the FDIC will share in 

a portion of future asset losses and 

recoveries for a specific time period. 

136 A
In return, the AI agrees to manage the 

failed bank assets consistently with 

its legacy assets, pursue residential 

loan modifications on qualified loans, 

and work to minimize losses. Since 

loss sharing began in November 2008, 

through June 30, 2012, the Corporation 

had entered into more than 290 SLAs 

involving $212.7 billion in covered 

assets. 

The FDIC has established controls 

over its SLA monitoring program, 

which help protect the FDIC’s 

interests and meet the goals of the 

program. We have pointed out that 

the FDIC should place additional 

emphasis on monitoring commercial 

loan extension decisions to ensure 

that AIs do not inappropriately reject 

loan modification requests as SLAs 

approach termination. Additionally, 

the FDIC needs to formulate a better 

strategy for mitigating the impact of 

impending portfolio sales and SLA 

terminations on the Deposit Insurance 

Fund (DIF) so that the FDIC will be 

prepared to address a potentially 

significant volume of asset sale 

requests.

As another resolution strategy, the 

FDIC has entered into 34 structured 

sales transactions involving 42,900 

assets with a total unpaid principal 

balance of about $26.0 billion. Under 

these arrangements, the FDIC retains 

a participation interest in future net 

positive cash flows derived from 

third-party management of the 

assets. Such transactions involve 

selling assets to third parties that are 

not regulated financial institutions. 

Differences in controls in place for 

regulated financial institutions, in 

contrast to private capital investors 

with unregulated systems of internal 

control that are not subject to regular 

oversight by banking supervisors, 

can present challenges. Such 

arrangements need to be closely 

monitored to ensure compliance 

with all terms and conditions of the 

agreements. Compliance with the 

agreements is important to ensure that 

the FDIC receives the cash flows to 

which it is entitled.

Other post-closing asset management 

activities will continue to require much 

FDIC attention. FDIC receiverships 

manage assets from failed institutions, 

mostly those that are not purchased 

by acquiring institutions through SLAs 

or involved in structured sales. As of 

December 31, 2012, the Division of 

Resolutions and Receiverships (DRR) 

was managing 466 active receiverships 

(including three FSLIC-related) with 

assets totaling about $17.0 billion. 

These assets include securities, 

delinquent commercial real-estate and 

single-family loans, and participation 

loans. Post-closing asset managers 

are responsible for managing many of 

these assets and rely on receivership 

assistance contractors to perform 

day-to-day asset management 

functions. Since these loans are often 

sub-performing or nonperforming, 

workout and asset disposition efforts 

can be intensive and challenging.

Maintaining the 

Viability of the Deposit 

Insurance Fund 

Insuring deposits remains at the heart 

of the FDIC’s commitment to maintain 

stability and public confidence in 

the nation’s financial system. The 

Dodd-Frank Act made permanent 

the increase in the coverage limit to 

$250,000. It also provided deposit 

insurance coverage on the entire 

balance of noninterest-bearing 

transaction accounts at all insured 

depository institutions (IDIs) until 

December 31, 2012. A priority and 

ongoing challenge for the FDIC is to 

ensure that the DIF remains viable 

to protect all insured depositors. To 

maintain sufficient DIF balances, the 

FDIC collects risk-based insurance 

premiums from insured institutions 

and invests deposit insurance funds. 

In the aftermath of the financial 

crisis, FDIC-insured institutions 

continue to make gradual but steady 

progress. Commercial banks and 

savings institutions insured by the 

FDIC reported aggregate net income 

of $37.6 billion in the third quarter of 

2012, a $2.3 billion improvement from 

the $35.2 billion in profits the industry 

reported in the third quarter of 2011. 

This is the 12th consecutive quarter 

that earnings have registered a yearover-year increase. Also noteworthy 

with respect to the viability of the 

fund was the decline in the number 

of banks on the FDIC’s “Problem 

List” from 813 in the fourth quarter 

of 2011 to 651 in the fourth quarter 

of 2012. The fourth quarter marked 

the seventh consecutive quarter that 

the number of problem banks has 

fallen. As noted earlier, total assets of 

“problem” institutions also declined 

year-over-year between 2011 and 2012 

from $319.4 billion to $233 billion. 

Eight insured institutions failed during 

the fourth quarter—the smallest 

number of failures in a quarter since 

the second quarter of 2008, when there 

were two. 

In light of such progress, the DIF 

balance has continued to increase. 

During 2012, the DIF balance 

increased by $21.2 billion, from 

$11.8 billion to $33.0 billion. Over the 

twelve consecutive quarters since the 

beginning of 2010, the fund balance 

has increased a total of $53.8 billion.

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

While the fund is considerably 

stronger than it has been, the FDIC 

must continue to monitor the 

emerging risks that can threaten fund 

solvency in the interest of continuing 

to provide the insurance coverage 

that depositors have come to rely 

upon. Given the volatility of the global 

markets and financial systems, new 

risks can emerge without warning and 

threaten the safety and soundness 

of U.S. financial institutions and the 

viability of the DIF. The FDIC must be 

prepared for such a possibility. 

Ensuring Institution Safety 

and Soundness Through an 

Effective Examination and 

Supervision Program

The Corporation’s supervision 

program promotes the safety and 

soundness of FDIC-supervised 

IDIs. The FDIC is the primary 

federal regulator for approximately 

4,500 FDIC-insured, state-chartered 

institutions that are not members of 

the Federal Reserve Board (FRB)—

generally referred to as “state 

non-member” institutions. As such, 

the FDIC is the lead federal regulator 

for the majority of community banks. 

The Chairman has made it clear that 

one of the FDIC’s most important 

priorities is the future of community 

banks and the critical role they play 

in the financial system and the U.S. 

economy as a whole. The Corporation 

has undertaken a number of initiatives 

to further its understanding of 

the challenges and opportunities 

facing community banks, including 

a conference, a comprehensive 

study, and an assessment of both 

risk-management and compliance 

supervision practices to see if there 

are ways to make the supervisory 

processes more efficient. It will 

continue its efforts in this regard going 

forward.

Through the FDIC’s examination 

program, examiners assess the 

adequacy of the bank’s management 

and internal control systems to 

identify, measure, monitor, and 

control risks; and bank examiners 

judge the safety and soundness of a 

bank’s operations. When the FDIC 

determines that an institution’s 

condition is less than satisfactory, 

it may take a variety of supervisory 

actions, including informal and 

formal enforcement actions against 

the institution or its directors and 

officers and others associated with 

the institution, to address identified 

deficiencies and, in some cases, 

ultimately ban individuals from 

banking. Generally, the FDIC pursues 

enforcement actions for violations of 

laws, rules, or regulations; unsafe or 

unsound banking practices; breaches 

of fiduciary duty; and violations of 

final orders, conditions imposed in 

writing, or written agreements. In 

addition, the FDIC has the statutory 

authority to terminate the deposit 

insurance of any IDI for violation 

of a law, rule, regulation, condition 

imposed in writing, or written 

agreement, or for being in an unsafe 

or unsound condition or engaging in 

unsafe or unsound banking practices. 

Part of the FDIC’s overall 

responsibility and authority to 

examine banks for safety and 

soundness relates to compliance 

with the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), 

which requires financial institutions 

to develop and implement a BSA 

compliance program to monitor 

for suspicious activity and mitigate 

associated money laundering risks 

within the financial institution. 

This includes keeping records and 

filing reports on certain financial 

transactions. An institution’s level of 

risk for potential terrorist financing 

and money laundering determines the 

necessary scope of a Bank Secrecy 

Act examination. Maintaining a 

strong examination program, vigilant 

supervisory activities, and effective 

enforcement action processes for 

all institutions and applying lessons 

learned in light of the recent crisis will 

be critical to ensuring stability and 

continued confidence in the financial 

system going forward. 

Another challenging supervisory 

issue that concerns the FDIC, and 

community banks in particular, 

relates to Basel III and recently 

proposed changes to the federal 

banking agencies’ regulatory capital 

requirements. In June 2012, the 

federal banking agencies issued 

for public comment three separate 

Notices of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NPR), proposing changes to the 

regulatory capital requirements. 

The agencies proposed the NPRs to 

address deficiencies in bank capital 

requirements that became evident 

in the recent banking crisis. The 

FDIC is reviewing the more than 

2,000 comments it has received so 

that it can address concerns about 

the costs and potential unintended 

consequences of various aspects 

of the proposals. As the primary 

federal supervisor for the majority 

of community banks, the FDIC is 

particularly focused on ensuring 

that community banks are able to 

properly analyze the capital proposals 

and assess their impact. The basic 

purpose of the Basel III framework 

is to strengthen the long-term quality 

and quantity of the capital base of 

the U.S. banking system. The FDIC’s 

challenge is to achieve that goal in a 

way that is responsive to the concerns 

expressed by community banks 

about the potential for unintended 

consequences, and the FDIC will be 

138 A
carefully considering such issues in 

the coming months. 

Protecting and Educating 

Consumers and Ensuring 

an Effective Compliance 

Program

The FDIC serves a number of key 

roles in the financial system and 

among the most important is its work 

in ensuring that banks serve their 

communities and treat consumers 

fairly. The FDIC carries out its role 

by providing consumers with access 

to information about their rights 

and disclosures that are required 

by federal laws and regulations and 

examining the banks where the FDIC 

is the primary federal regulator to 

determine the institutions’ compliance 

with laws and regulations governing 

consumer protection, fair lending, and 

community investment. During early 

2011, in response to the Dodd-Frank 

Act and in conjunction with creation 

of the Consumer Financial Protection 

Bureau (CFPB), the FDIC established 

its new Division of Depositor and 

Consumer Protection. This Division 

is responsible for the Corporation’s 

compliance examination and 

enforcement program as well as the 

depositor protection and consumer 

and community affairs activities that 

support that program. It has also 

adopted a new coordinating role with 

CFPB on consumer issues of mutual 

interest. 

Historically, turmoil in the credit and 

mortgage markets has presented 

regulators, policymakers, and the 

financial services industry with 

serious challenges. The FDIC has 

been committed to working with 

the Congress and others to ensure 

that the banking system remains 

sound and that the broader financial 

system is positioned to meet the 

credit needs of consumers and the 

economy, especially the needs of 

creditworthy households that may 

experience distress. A challenging 

priority articulated by the Chairman 

is to continue to increase access to 

financial services for the unbanked 

and underbanked in the United States. 

Successful activities in pursuit of this 

priority will continue to require effort 

on the part of the Corporation going 

forward.

Consumers today are also concerned 

about data security and financial 

privacy at their banks, and the 

FDIC needs to promote effective 

controls within the banks to 

protect consumers. Banks are 

also increasingly using third-party 

servicers to provide support for 

core information and transaction 

processing functions, and the sensitive 

information servicers handle can be 

vulnerable. The FDIC must continue 

to ensure that financial institutions 

protect the privacy and security of 

information about customers under 

applicable U.S. laws and regulations. 

New cyber threats emerge frequently, 

and financial institutions and their 

servicers face continuing challenges 

safeguarding highly sensitive 

information from unauthorized 

disclosure that can cause financial and 

personal distress or ruin.

Effectively Managing the 

FDIC Workforce and Other 

Corporate Resources

The FDIC must effectively and 

economically manage and utilize a 

number of critical strategic resources 

in order to carry out its mission 

successfully, particularly its human, 

financial, information technology 

(IT), and physical resources. These 

resources have been stretched during 

the past years of the recent crisis, and 

the Corporation will continue to face 

challenges as it returns to a steadier 

state of operations and carries out 

its mission in both headquarters 

and regional office locations. New 

responsibilities, reorganizations, and 

changes in senior leadership and in 

the makeup of the FDIC Board have 

affected the entire FDIC workforce 

over the past few years. Efforts 

to promote sound governance and 

effective stewardship of its core 

business processes and the IT 

systems supporting those processes, 

along with attention to human and 

physical resources, will be key to the 

Corporation’s success in the months 

ahead. 

As the number of financial institution 

failures continues to decline, the 

Corporation is reshaping its workforce 

and adjusting its budget and resources 

accordingly. The FDIC closed the 

West Coast Office and the Midwest 

Office in January 2012 and September 

2012, respectively, and plans to close 

the East Coast Office in 2014. In 

this connection, authorized staffing 

for DRR, in particular, has fallen 

from a peak of 2,460 in 2010 to 1,463 

proposed for 2013, which reflects a 

reduction of 393 positions from 2012 

and 997 positions over three years. 

DRR contractor funding also has fallen 

from a peak of $1.34 billion in 2010 to 

about $457 million proposed for 2013, 

a reduction of about $319 million 

from 2012 and nearly $885 million 

(66 percent) over three years. Still, the 

significant surge in failed-bank assets 

and associated contracting activities 

will continue to require effective 

and efficient contractor oversight 

management and technical monitoring 

functions.

With the number of troubled FDICsupervised institutions also on 

Apdic
ANNUAL REPORT 2012

the decline, the FDIC has reduced 

authorized nonpermanent examination 

staff as well. Risk management 

examination staffing has declined 

from a peak of 2,237 in 2011 to 1,966 

proposed for 2013, a reduction of 271 

nonpermanent positions. The number 

of compliance examination staff as 

well has begun to decline, though not 

as much—from a peak of 572 in 2012 

to 522 proposed for 2013, a reduction 

of 50 nonpermanent positions. 

To fund operations, the FDIC Board 

of Directors recently approved a 

$2.7 billion Corporate Operating 

Budget for 2013, about 18 percent 

lower than the 2012 budget. In 

conjunction with its approval of 

the 2013 budget, the Board also 

approved an authorized 2013 staffing 

level of 8,026 employees, down 

from 8,713 previously authorized, 

a net reduction of 687 positions, 

with further reductions projected in 

2014 and future years. The FDIC’s 

operating expenses are paid from 

the DIF, and consistent with sound 

corporate governance principles, the 

Corporation’s financial management 

efforts must continuously seek to 

be efficient and cost-conscious, 

particularly in a government-wide 

environment that is facing severe 

budgetary constraints. 

As conditions improve throughout 

the industry and the economy, the 

Corporation and staff are adjusting 

to a new work environment and 

workplace. The closing of the two 

temporary offices and the plans for 

closing the third can disrupt current 

workplace conditions. 

These closings can also introduce 

risks, as workload, responsibilities, 

and files are transferred and 

employees depart to take other 

positions—sometimes external to 

the FDIC. Fewer risk management 

and compliance examiners can also 

pose challenges to the successful 

accomplishment of the FDIC’s 

examination responsibilities. 

Further, the ramping up of the 

new Office of Complex Financial 

Institutions, with hiring from both 

internal and external sources will 

continue to require attention—with 

respect to on-boarding, training, 

and retaining staff with requisite 

skills for the challenging functions 

of that office. For all employees, in 

light of a transitioning workplace, 

the Corporation will seek to sustain 

its emphasis on fostering employee 

engagement and morale. Its new 

Workplace Excellence Program is a 

step in that direction. 

From an IT perspective, amidst 

the heightened activity in the 

industry and economy, the FDIC has 

engaged in in massive amounts of 

information sharing, both internally 

and with external partners. This 

is also true with respect to sharing 

of highly sensitive information 

with other members of the FSOC 

formed pursuant to the Dodd-Frank 

Act. As noted earlier with respect 

to OCFI, FDIC systems contain 

voluminous amounts of critical 

data. The Corporation needs to 

ensure the integrity, availability, 

and appropriate confidentiality of 

bank data, personally identifiable 

information, and other sensitive 

information in an environment of 

increasingly sophisticated security 

threats and global connectivity. In 

a related vein, continued attention 

to ensuring the physical security of 

all FDIC resources is also a priority. 

The FDIC needs to be sure that its 

emergency response plans provide for 

the safety and physical security of its 

personnel and ensure that its business 

continuity planning and disaster 

recovery capability keep critical 

business functions operational during 

any emergency. 

Finally, a key component of 

corporate governance at the FDIC 

is the FDIC Board of Directors. 

With the confirmations of the FDIC 

Chairman and Vice Chairman, along 

with appointments of others to 

fill Board positions over the past 

year, the Board is now operating 

at full strength. The Board will 

likely face challenges in leading 

the organization, accomplishing 

the Chairman’s priorities, and 

coordinating with the other regulatory 

agencies on issues of mutual 

concern and shared responsibility. 

Enterprise risk management is a 

related aspect of governance at the 

FDIC. Notwithstanding a stronger 

economy and financial services 

industry, the FDIC’s enterprise risk 

management activities need to be 

attuned to emerging risks, both 

internal and external to the FDIC, and 

the Corporation as a whole needs to 

be ready to take necessary steps to 

mitigate those risks as changes occur 

and challenging scenarios present 

themselves.

140 A