Database Search Results

Although 12 U.S.C. § 3909(a)(1) provides the agencies with the authority to interpret terms and prescribe regulations, it does so in broad terms. The statute does not instruct the agency on specific regulatory tasks beyond “effectuating the purposes of this chapter and preventing evasions.” This falls under Hickman’s “General Authority” delegation because it grants rulemaking power without clearly identifying specific regulatory actions to undertake beyond general goals.

12 U.S.C. § 3909(a)(1) explicitly authorizes the appropriate Federal banking agencies to prescribe rules and regulations to effectuate the purposes of the chapter and prevent evasions thereof. 12 CFR Part 252, which implements enhanced prudential standards, falls directly within this mandated authorization. The ‘Authority’ section of 12 CFR Part 252 also cites 12 U.S.C. 3909.

The statute specifically instructs the appropriate federal banking agencies to establish minimum capital levels and to use other appropriate methods to ensure banks maintain adequate capital, including considering countercyclical measures. This goes beyond a broad delegation and identifies a specific regulatory task.

12 U.S. Code § 3907 is explicitly listed in the “Authority” section of 12 CFR Part 45, directly mandating capital adequacy regulations.

The statute clearly instructs the “appropriate Federal banking agency” to “cause banking institutions to achieve and maintain adequate capital by establishing minimum levels of capital”. While some discretion is afforded through phrasing like “such other methods as the appropriate Federal banking agency deems appropriate,” the central directive is specific and related to establishing capital adequacy standards. The 2010 amendment further reinforces this by directing the agency to make capital standards countercyclical.

12 U.S.C. § 3907 is explicitly listed in the “Authority” section of 12 CFR Part 5. This signifies a direct mandate for the regulation.

The statute provides specific direction to the Federal banking agencies by mandating a review process for economic feasibility evaluations of certain foreign loans and tying in other authorities like Sections 1818 and 3909. While it uses terms like “appropriate”, it is directly tied to regulatory tasks concerning foreign loans.

12 U.S.C. § 3908(b) states that the “economic feasibility evaluations shall be reviewed by representatives of the appropriate Federal banking agencies whenever an examination…is conducted.” This authorizes the agencies to review these evaluations, but doesn’t mandate specific regulatory action. Section (c)(1) further states that the authorities of the Federal banking agencies contained in section 1818 and 3909 “shall be applicable to this section,” giving the agencies further power to enforce. This constitutes authorization.

While Part 217 implements broad rules, 12 U.S.C. § 3908 specifically tasks banking agencies with the review of economic feasibility evaluations of foreign loans, and references other authorities granted to the Federal Banking Agencies as applicable to section 3908. This is a specific directive related to the risk assessment of banking institutions and foreign loans, which falls under the “Specific Authority Delegations” category.

12 U.S.C. § 3908(b) requires Federal banking agencies to review economic feasibility evaluations. The statute authorizes (but does not directly mandate) the agencies to issue regulations related to how such reviews are conducted and, more broadly, to overall capital adequacy standards considering foreign loans. Part 217 appears to be one such regulatory action.

While the statute does not mandate rulemaking, it specifically directs federal banking agencies to review the economic feasibility evaluations. This is a defined task related to foreign loan oversight. Moreover, 12 U.S.C. 3908(c)(1) makes existing authorities under Sections 1818 and 3909 applicable, giving agencies further enforcement powers that fall under the category of regulating in response to the bank evaluations. The delegation outlines a specific regulatory task tied to the foreign loan evaluations, making it a Specific Authority delegation.

The statute mandates that banks conduct and document feasibility studies for certain foreign loans. Federal banking agencies are then required to review these evaluations. While the content of the evaluation is mandated, the agencies have discretion (implied by “review”) in how they use these evaluations in their oversight. Therefore, the statute authorizes the banking agencies to act upon the evaluations but does not mandate specific regulations regarding their actions, examination processes, or the precise consequences stemming from their review.

The statute instructs agencies to establish minimum capital levels and use “other methods” to ensure adequate capital, further instructing the agencies to seek to make capital standards countercyclical. While using terms like “appropriate” and “necessary,” it provides specific direction on a clear regulatory task.

12 U.S.C. § 3907 is explicitly listed in the “Authority” section of 12 CFR Part 225. This indicates that the regulation is directly mandated, or at least authorized and relied upon, by the statute.

While the statute uses terms like “appropriate” and “necessary” which allow for agency discretion, it clearly instructs the agency to achieve the specific regulatory task of maintaining adequate capital at banking institutions and making capital standards countercyclical. It is not simply a grant of broad rulemaking authority without a specific goal.

The statute explicitly directs the appropriate Federal banking agencies to establish minimum capital levels for banking institutions and to use other appropriate methods to ensure adequate capital. This is a direct mandate.

The statute provides clear instructions regarding the specific regulatory task: ensuring banking institutions maintain adequate capital and using methods the agency deems “appropriate” to achieve this. It even specifies how the agency can address failures to meet minimum capital levels (e.g., issuing directives). While the term “appropriate” allows for agency discretion, the statute still provides specific objectives and tools.

The statute directly mandates that appropriate Federal banking agencies establish minimum capital levels for banking institutions. The regulation, 12 CFR Part 263, includes Subpart E, which establishes procedures for issuing and enforcing directives to maintain adequate capital, which directly relates to the statute’s mandate.

The statute clearly instructs the agencies on a specific regulatory task: to ensure banks maintain adequate capital. While using open-ended terms like “adequate” and “appropriate”, it tasks agencies to establish “minimum levels of capital” and use “other methods as the appropriate Federal banking agency deems appropriate.” This falls under Hickman’s “Specific Authority” because it tasks an agency to address a specific area.

12 U.S.C. § 3907(a)(1) states that each appropriate Federal banking agency “shall cause banking institutions to achieve and maintain adequate capital by establishing minimum levels of capital for such banking institutions and by using such other methods as the appropriate Federal banking agency deems appropriate.” This directly mandates the agencies to establish capital adequacy standards. The regulation, 12 CFR Part 3, implements these standards.

The statute specifically instructs the agencies to establish minimum capital levels and to use methods deemed “appropriate” to ensure adequate capital. The 2010 amendment further directs them to make capital standards countercyclical. Even though the agencies retain discretion in how they achieve these goals, the statute identifies a specific regulatory task: capital adequacy.

The statute directly mandates the appropriate Federal banking agencies to ensure banking institutions maintain adequate capital by establishing minimum levels and using other appropriate methods. The statute uses mandatory language (“shall cause”).

The statute identifies a specific regulatory task: to require banking institutions to submit and disclose information regarding foreign country exposure. While the statute uses the term “appropriate” Federal banking agency and allows the agency to prescribe the “format” of the submitted information, it provides a clearly defined regulatory task.

The statute explicitly states that each appropriate Federal banking agency “shall require, by regulation” the submission and disclosure of specific information. This constitutes a direct mandate to create regulations.

The statute provides a specific regulatory task: to require banking institutions to submit and disclose information regarding foreign country exposure. It even specifies the frequency of submission (four times per year) and the content of the disclosure (material foreign country exposure in relation to assets and capital). While it uses open-ended terms like “appropriate” and “material,” the specific tasks outlined put it squarely in the Specific Authority category.

The statute explicitly states that each appropriate Federal banking agency “shall require, by regulation” specific actions regarding the submission and disclosure of international lending data. This makes the relationship directly mandated.

The statute clearly instructs the agency on specific regulatory tasks: collecting information on foreign country exposure from banking institutions, prescribing the format of the information, and requiring banking institutions to disclose information regarding material foreign country exposure. While the agencies have discretion on the specific requirements of those tasks, the statute leaves no doubt those regulatory requirements must be fulfilled.

The statute uses the language “shall require, by regulation,” explicitly mandating the agencies to create regulations concerning the submission and disclosure of international lending data.

While the statute gives the agency discretion (“deems appropriate,” “in its discretion”), it is still instructing the agency on a specific regulatory task: establishing and maintaining adequate capital levels for banking institutions. The law uses language that gives the agency discretion in determining how to meet this specific goal of “adequate capital.”

The statute directly mandates the “appropriate Federal banking agency” to establish minimum capital levels and use other methods to ensure adequate capital for banking institutions. It uses the word “shall,” indicating a direct mandate.

The statute specifically instructs the appropriate Federal banking agencies to “establish minimum levels of capital” and provides direction on countercyclical capital standards. Even though discretion is afforded through terms such as “deems appropriate” and “necessary or appropriate,” the statute assigns a specific regulatory task.

12 U.S.C. § 3907(a)(1) states that each appropriate Federal banking agency “shall cause banking institutions to achieve and maintain adequate capital by establishing minimum levels of capital”. This directly mandates the agency to establish capital adequacy regulations.

While Section 3901(b) directs the Federal banking agencies to consult with other countries and reach understandings on supervisory policies, the statute overall provides broad goals and a general framework for strengthening the bank regulatory framework and enhancing international coordination. It doesn’t provide specific tasks related to rulemaking. Therefore, it represents a general delegation of authority to the agencies to achieve these goals.

The regulation, 12 CFR Part 28, specifically cites 12 U.S.C. § 3901 et seq. in its authority section. This means the regulation is directly mandated by the statute because the statute forms the basis for the regulatory authority.

The statute provides clear instructions on what regulatory tasks the agencies should undertake, including the establishment and maintenance of special reserves, the analysis of foreign loan rescheduling negotiations, and ensuring adequate capital and reserve positions of banks. The statute includes criteria for when such reserves should be established. While the agencies retain discretion in judgment, the statute specifies the regulatory task.

12 U.S.C. § 3904(c) explicitly mandates that appropriate Federal banking agencies “shall promulgate regulations or orders necessary to implement this section,” making the statute-regulation relationship directly mandated. 12 CFR Part 217’s authority section explicitly lists 12 U.S.C. § 3904 as statutory authority.

The statute provides a clear regulatory task – the establishment and maintenance of special reserves for banking institutions facing impaired assets due to foreign debt issues. It lays out specific factors to consider when determining impairment (failure to pay interest, failure to comply with restructured debt terms, etc.). Although terms like “appropriate” and “necessary” appear, they are used within a framework that instructs agencies on a specific regulatory task, making this a specific authority delegation.

12 U.S.C. § 3904(c) explicitly mandates that “The appropriate Federal banking agencies shall promulgate regulations or orders necessary to implement this section within one hundred and twenty days after November 30, 1983.” The regulation, 12 CFR Part 252, falls within the scope of implementing the statute.

The statute instructs the agencies to promulgate regulations to achieve specific goals: to avoid excessive debt service burdens and to establish appropriate accounting treatment of certain fees. While the language includes terms like “necessary” and “appropriate,” the statute identifies the precise regulatory task and the aim the regulations should fulfill.

12 U.S.C. § 3905(a)(2)(A) states that each appropriate Federal banking agency “shall promulgate such regulations as are necessary to further carry out the provisions of this subsection” and 12 U.S.C. § 3905(b)(1) states that the agencies “shall promulgate regulations for accounting for agency, commitment, management and other fees charged by a banking institution in connection with an international loan.” This directly mandates regulation. The statute itself is listed in the Authority section of 12 CFR Part 208.

The statute “clearly instructs an agency on a specific regulatory task” – requiring the agency to collect and disclose international lending data. Although terms like “material” are used, which allows for agency discretion, the overall instruction is specific.

12 U.S.C. § 3906 explicitly directs the “appropriate Federal banking agency” to require, by regulation, specific actions (submission and disclosure of foreign country exposure information) from banking institutions. This makes the relationship directly mandated.

12 U.S.C. § 3803(d)(3) states that the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection “shall… promulgate regulations under subsection (a)(4) after the designated transfer date.” This clearly instructs the agency to perform a specific regulatory task – the promulgation of regulations governing alternative mortgage transactions made after a specified date. Even though the scope of the regulations is somewhat open-ended, the statute directly mandates the action.

The regulation, 12 CFR Part 1004, explicitly cites 12 U.S.C. 3803 as one of its authorities. This direct citation implies a direct mandate for the regulation’s existence and content.

While the statute’s language authorizing regulations for “alternative mortgage transactions” could be considered broad, it specifically directs the agencies (Comptroller of the Currency, NCUA, OTS, and BCFP) to regulate a defined category of transactions. Subsection (d) further directs the BCFP review existing regulations and promulgate new ones. This level of specificity classifies it as a specific authority delegation, even if the specific content of those regulations is left to agency discretion.

12 U.S.C. § 3803 is explicitly listed in the authority section of 12 CFR Part 160, directly mandating the regulations pertaining to lending and investment practices, particularly concerning alternative mortgage transactions.

The statute provides a specific regulatory task: to prescribe regulations to carry out the purpose of ensuring that adjustable rate mortgage loans include a limitation on the maximum interest rate.

The statute explicitly states that the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System “shall prescribe regulations to carry out the purposes of this section.” This is a direct mandate.

The statute clearly instructs the Board of Governors to prescribe regulations specifically to “carry out the purposes of this section,” which is to ensure that adjustable rate mortgage loans include a limitation on the maximum interest rate. While the language leaves room for interpretation regarding the specific nature of the regulations, it directs the agency toward a particular regulatory goal.

Subsection (b) of 12 U.S.C. § 3806 explicitly states that the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System “shall prescribe regulations to carry out the purposes of this section.” This constitutes a direct mandate.