Database Search Results

The statute provides specific instructions on the process of foreclosure, including the role of the Secretary and the foreclosure commissioner, the conditions under which foreclosure can commence, and procedures for substitution and notification. It directs the agency (the Secretary and foreclosure commissioner) on a specific regulatory task: the nonjudicial foreclosure of multifamily mortgages, with fairly detailed instructions on process and discretion.

12 U.S.C. § 3707 directly mandates the Secretary to request foreclosure commencement under specific conditions. It also outlines specific procedures for designating substitute foreclosure commissioners, including considerations for fairness to the mortgagor and specific notice requirements. These actions are not merely authorized but are required when the specified conditions are met.

The statute, particularly subsection (c) and (i), specifically instructs the Comptroller of the Currency to approve or consent to the establishment or movement of branch locations. This explicit instruction falls under the definition of Specific Authority Delegations, as it pinpoints a definite regulatory task related to branch operations and requires Comptroller approval. While “approval” and “consent” are open-ended, they still create a focused task.

12 U.S.C. § 36 is explicitly listed in the “Authority” section of 12 CFR Part 208, demonstrating a direct mandate for the regulation. The statute empowers the Federal Reserve to regulate state banking institutions’ membership, and 12 U.S.C. 36 pertains to conditions of operating branch banks.

12 U.S.C. § 36 specifically allows the Comptroller of the Currency to approve or disapprove applications for banks to open or retain branches. This constitutes a specific regulatory task, even with open-ended terms such as ‘approved’.

12 U.S.C. § 36 is explicitly listed as an authority for 12 CFR Part 25, indicating that the regulation is directly mandated by the statute.

The statute specifically instructs the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to regulate the charges related to check clearing and collection services. This qualifies as a Specific Authority delegation under Hickman’s framework because it focuses on a clearly defined regulatory task, rather than providing broad authority across an entire area.

The statute explicitly directs the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to “fix the charges to be collected by the depository institutions from its patrons whose checks and other items… are cleared through the Federal reserve bank and the charge which may be imposed for the service of clearing or collection rendered by the Federal reserve bank.” This is a direct mandate to create regulations regarding these charges.

The statute identifies a specific regulatory gap, the lack of a uniform federal foreclosure remedy for multifamily mortgages, and instructs the Secretary of HUD to create one. It provides a detailed list of problems the remedy is intended to solve. While the details of the remedy are left to the agency, the problem and the general approach are laid out very clearly.

The statute explicitly identifies the problem of disparate state foreclosure laws and the need for a uniform federal remedy, and then authorizes the Secretary to create that remedy. 24 CFR Part 27 directly implements this mandate by establishing the procedures for nonjudicial foreclosure of multifamily mortgages. The “Authority” section of the CFR explicitly cites 12 U.S.C. 3701-3717, showing a direct statutory mandate.

While 12 U.S.C. § 3702 is a definition section, and definitions themselves do not delegate authority, the sections which the definition supports do delegate authority and tasks to the Secretary. The provision of definitions for terms like “mortgage”, “multifamily mortgage”, etc., found in section 3702 provides the foundation for the Secretary to act with the authorities that are established in sections 3701-3717. These authorities instruct the agency to regulate nonjudicial foreclosures using open-ended terms, which still falls under the specific authority delegation classification.

The statute provides definitions that are used within Chapter 38 of Title 12. While 24 CFR Part 27 lists 12 U.S.C. 3701-3717 as authority, implying a relationship, the definitions themselves do not mandate any specific regulations. The agency is authorized to regulate nonjudicial foreclosures and relies on these definitions, but the definitions themselves do not require them to do so.

While the statute uses broad language like “limitations, restrictions, and regulations,” it does so within the specific context of advances made by Federal Reserve Banks. The statute specifies the type of transaction (advances), the actors involved (Federal Reserve Banks, individuals, partnerships, corporations), the permissible collateral (direct obligations of the U.S. etc.), and the time frame (90 days). This level of specificity, even with the use of open-ended terms, indicates a specific authority delegation.

The statute, 12 U.S.C. § 347c, explicitly states that advances by Federal Reserve Banks are “subject to such limitations, restrictions, and regulations as the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may prescribe.” This language directly mandates the Board to issue regulations regarding these advances.

While broad, the statute clearly instructs the agency (Board of Governors) on a specific regulatory task: to supervise the relationships and transactions between Federal Reserve Banks and foreign banks. It further elaborates on certain specific requirements, such as obtaining permission for negotiations and reporting on conferences. Even the phrase “such regulations, conditions, and limitations as the Board may prescribe” is sufficiently tethered to the specific context to qualify as specific authority delegation.

The statute directly mandates the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to exercise special supervision over relationships and transactions of Federal reserve banks with foreign banks, and states that these relationships and transactions shall be subject to regulations prescribed by the Board. This is a clear directive to regulate.

The statute grants the Comptroller of the Currency discretionary authority to approve conversions “subject to such conditions as he may prescribe.” It provides a broad framework for the conversion process, empowering the Comptroller to determine the specific regulatory tasks and conditions required to ensure the safe and sound operation of the converting bank.

The statute, 12 U.S.C. § 35, authorizes the Comptroller of the Currency to approve the conversion of state banks into national banking associations and to prescribe conditions for that conversion. While it lays out the framework and requirements for conversion, it doesn’t mandate specific regulations but rather empowers the Comptroller to implement the process. The Statute also mentions the Federal Reserve Act and National Banking Act, so there is an indirect mandate.

The statute 12 U.S.C. § 357 specifically instructs the Federal Reserve Banks to establish rates of discount. While “accommodating commerce and business” provides some discretion, it is within a narrowly defined task. The statute identifies a specific regulatory task for the agency to undertake.

The statute 12 U.S.C. § 357 directly mandates that Federal Reserve Banks establish rates of discount, subject to the review and determination of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The regulation 12 CFR Part 201 provides specific guidance and rules regarding these extensions of credit, including interest rates, eligibility, and limitations, directly implementing the statutory mandate to establish discount rates.

The statute, 12 U.S.C. § 358, specifically directs the Board to prescribe regulations governing the establishment of accounts with other Federal Reserve banks, opening and maintaining accounts in foreign countries, appointing correspondents, and establishing agencies in such countries. While “wheresoever it may be deemed best for the purpose of purchasing, selling, and collecting bills of exchange” provides some flexibility, the statute identifies a specific regulatory task and empowers the Board to create rules to achieve it.

12 U.S.C. § 358 explicitly states that the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System can prescribe regulations regarding accounts with foreign banks and related activities. The regulation (12 CFR Part 214) implements this specific authorization to regulate relationships with foreign banks.

The inclusion of specific US Code sections in the regulation’s authority indicates that the agency is drawing power from specific statutory provisions, directing regulatory tasks like “Minimum Security Devices and Procedures, Reports of Suspicious Activities, and Bank Secrecy Act Compliance Program”. Even with the repealed statute listed, other sections provide specific direction.

12 U.S.C. § 3421 is explicitly listed in the regulation’s authority section. While the statute itself is repealed, the regulation still cites the entire range of 3401-3422, which implies that even the repealed section served as authorization, even if it’s no longer in effect. The regulation is authorized but not necessarily directly mandated by this specific section due to its repealed status. The regulations address reporting requirements, which aligns with the description of the repealed statute.

The statute addresses a specific issue (applicability of a chapter to the SEC) rather than providing broad rulemaking authority. Although the language of 12 USC 3422 itself does not mandate or authorize specific regulations, the inclusion of this statutory section within the authority section of 12 CFR Part 21 indicates that the agency is using the statute to justify the entire regulation.

12 U.S.C. § 3422 is listed in the “Authority” section of 12 CFR Part 21, meaning the regulation is directly mandated by the statute.

The statute, 12 U.S.C. § 347a, provides detailed instructions regarding the conditions under which Federal Reserve Banks can make advances to member banks. It specifies the consent required, the types of promissory notes involved, limitations on liability, interest rates, and ineligibility of certain obligations as collateral. These are specific regulatory tasks assigned to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and Federal Reserve Banks.

12 CFR Part 201 (Regulation A) explicitly cites 12 U.S.C. § 347a in its authority section, indicating a direct mandate for the regulation.

The statute provides the Federal Reserve Bank the authority to make advances to member banks under specific conditions (inadequate assets, group lending, etc.) and sets limitations on such lending (interest rates, collateral, liability limits). While there is discretion granted in determining the “amount” of the advance, the statute still specifies the circumstances and constrains the action enough to be considered a specific authority delegation.

12 U.S.C. § 347a is explicitly listed as an authority for 12 CFR Part 263. This indicates a direct mandate, as the regulation’s existence is tied to the statute granting the agency power.

The statute gives the Board of Governors the authority to prescribe rules and regulations about the conditions under which advances can be made. However, it specifically dictates the types of advances permissible (time or demand notes, or notes secured by mortgage loans), the maximum maturity of some of these notes (four months), the types of institutions eligible (member banks), and other criteria for specific situations (undercapitalized institutions). While it uses terms like “satisfaction” and “as the Board may prescribe” regarding security and maturities, it does so within a tightly defined framework for this particular task.

The statute (12 U.S. Code § 347b) explicitly states that a Federal Reserve bank “may make advances…under rules and regulations prescribed by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.” This directly mandates the Board to prescribe rules and regulations governing these advances, thus making the relationship directly mandated.

While 12 U.S.C. § 3417 does address civil penalties and disciplinary actions for violations, the cited range of statutes provides broad authority to create regulations concerning bank security, reporting, and compliance. This falls under a broad mandate for financial institutions, indicative of a general authority delegation.

12 U.S.C. § 3417 is part of a chapter (3401-3422) cited as authority for 12 CFR Part 21. While the statute itself doesn’t explicitly mandate a specific regulation about minimum security devices and procedures, suspicious activity reporting, or BSA compliance programs, it authorizes regulations related to financial record privacy and enforcement, which is related to the subject matter of the regulation.

While Section 3418 itself doesn’t explicitly delegate authority for rulemaking (it focuses on injunctive relief), the surrounding sections 3401-3422 provide a framework for customer financial privacy which agencies may rely on to write regulations such as 12 CFR Part 21, to ensure compliance with the procedures outlined in the chapter. The authority citation for 12 CFR 21 includes these sections. Thus, agencies could be said to be operating under specific authority, with some open-endedness.

The statute 12 U.S.C. § 3418 provides a remedy (injunctive relief) to ensure compliance with the procedures outlined in the chapter of the U.S. Code that includes sections 3401-3422. The regulation, 12 CFR Part 21, references 12 U.S.C. 3401-3422 as an authority. Thus, the statute authorizes the regulations, but does not mandate them. The regulations aim to enforce and clarify the broader statutory scheme to which the remedy in 3418 applies.

While the statute itself is about tolling statutes of limitations and doesn’t explicitly instruct on creating regulations around that specific topic, the broader chapter (presumably Title XI, the Right to Financial Privacy Act) likely provides the more specific regulatory tasks for financial institutions and government authorities. The inclusion of 12 U.S.C. 3401-3422 as authority for the regulation suggests that the agency has interpreted the chapter as a specific grant of authority to implement regulations related to financial privacy and government access to financial records, which directly relates to the tolling of limitations in the given statute.

12 U.S.C. 3401-3422, which includes section 3419, is listed as authority for 12 CFR Part 21. This indicates that the regulation is authorized by the statute, but the statute doesn’t directly mandate the specific content or existence of the regulation.

The statute clearly instructs the agency (Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System) on a specific regulatory task: to “determine and regulate” reasonable charges, even providing a ceiling (10 cents per $100). While the term “reasonable” is open-ended, the statute identifies a clear regulatory goal.

12 U.S.C. § 342 explicitly authorizes the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to determine and regulate reasonable charges for collection or payment of checks and drafts. 12 CFR Part 210 directly implements this statutory mandate by establishing regulations governing the collection of checks and other items by Federal Reserve Banks.

12 U.S.C. § 3420 specifically regulates grand jury subpoenas related to financial records and prohibits certain notifications. While 12 CFR Part 21 addresses broader topics like security devices and suspicious activity reports, it also contains some regulations related to bank secrecy compliance, which has a tangential relationship with the statute. The statute gives clear instructions on a specific regulatory task.

12 U.S.C. 3401-3422 is listed in the authority section of 12 CFR Part 21, therefore, the relationship is authorized but not mandated.

While 12 U.S.C. 3413 does not instruct the agency on a specific regulatory task it uses open-ended terms delegating authority to supervisory agencies in the exercise of its supervisory, regulatory, or monetary functions.

12 U.S.C. 3413 provides exceptions to the general rule regarding the disclosure of financial records. While it doesn’t directly mandate specific regulations, it authorizes agencies to create regulations around supervisory, regulatory, and monetary functions related to financial institutions. The statute provides a framework in which agencies may operate, but they are not required to do so.

While the statute doesn’t explicitly command rulemaking in the language typically associated with specific authority (e.g., “shall promulgate regulations”), it establishes a framework for accessing financial records under certain conditions and with specific procedures (e.g., certifications, annual tabulations). It also addresses issues of non-disclosure and judicial review. These detailed provisions implicitly instruct the agency on how to implement the law, especially concerning defining the scope of permissible requests and how to oversee compliance, aligning with the “Specific Authority” delegation. The fact that the regulation encompasses security devices and suspicious activities suggests a broader scope than directly mandated by 3414 alone, but the reference is clearly there as part of the authority.

The regulation, 12 CFR Part 21, cites 12 U.S.C. 3401-3422 as authority. While the statute (12 U.S.C. § 3414) falls within this range, suggesting authorization, the statute itself primarily carves out exceptions to the Right to Financial Privacy Act for specific government activities and doesn’t explicitly mandate specific regulations. It authorizes access and sets conditions, implying an agency’s authority to act, but doesn’t demand a particular regulatory response.

The statute clearly instructs the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to regulate the “rates and conditions” of reimbursement for financial institutions providing financial records. This is a specific regulatory task, as it dictates what aspect the agency must regulate (rates and conditions of reimbursement) within a defined domain (financial records).

The statute explicitly states that “The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System shall, by regulation, establish the rates and conditions under which such payment may be made.” This is a direct mandate from Congress to the agency to issue regulations on the specified topic.

The statute specifically instructs the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to establish rates and conditions for reimbursement of costs incurred by financial institutions when providing financial records to government authorities. While the terms “rates” and “conditions” are somewhat open-ended, the task is clearly defined and specific.

The statute explicitly states “The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System shall, by regulation, establish the rates and conditions under which such payment may be made.” This is a direct mandate to create regulations on a specific topic.