BPI filed a comment letter Dec. 5 with the federal banking agencies, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and National Credit Union Administration expressing support for the core elements of a proposal to codify that supervisory guidance is nonbinding and cannot give rise to a Matter Requiring Attention (MRA) in the examination process. However, BPI requested that the regulators close carveouts in the proposal for “interpretive rules” that lack the force and effect of law, and that they clarify that an MRA cannot be based on vague notions of reputational risk without pointing to a specific practice or legal violation underpinning that risk. The proposal, which arose from BPI and the American Bankers Association’s 2018 petition for rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act, would codify the agencies’ 2018 Interagency Statement Clarifying the Role of Supervisory Guidance.
You Might Also Be Interested In...
Silicon Valley Bank
How Regulators Could Strengthen the Banking System Without Sacrificing the Economy
Silicon Valley Bank
BPI’s Jeremy Newell Testifies on SVB Supervision Before House Oversight Committee
More Posts by This Author
Bank Capital and Stress Testing
U.S. Bank Capital Levels: Aligning With or Exceeding Midpoint Estimates of Optimal
Central Bank Digital Currency
BPI’s Paige Pidano Paridon Testifies on CBDC Before House Subcommittee
Bank Activities and Structure
BPI Statement Before the U.S. House Financial Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology and Inclusion