Database Search Results
While the statute does not provide line-by-line instructions, subsection (h) directs the agency to prescribe regulations “requiring procedures reasonably designed to ensure and monitor compliance.” This provides a defined task and provides sufficient direction, therefore falling under the Specific Authority delegation.
The statute outlines specific requirements for insured state banks controlling or holding interests in financial subsidiaries, including compliance with capital, financial statement, and operational safeguard requirements. This clearly instructs agencies on specific regulatory tasks related to maintaining the safety and soundness of these subsidiaries.
The statute specifically instructs the agency (FDIC) on the regulatory tasks related to safety and soundness firewalls for financial subsidiaries of banks, particularly in ensuring state banks meet specific capital and operational requirements if they wish to control or hold interest in financial subsidiaries. It outlines specific conditions and references other sections for further guidance (e.g., sections 24a(c) and 24a(d) of Title 12), directing the agency on what and how to regulate.
Although 1831w does not use open-ended terms like “appropriate,” “reasonable,” or “necessary,” this statute is a specific authority delegation because it clearly identifies a regulatory task (safety and soundness firewalls for financial subsidiaries) and specifies conditions and cross-references to other sections that agencies must consider and implement, requiring targeted regulation to address a particular regulatory gap.
The statute explicitly describes certain financial and operational safeguards as well as capital requirements which informs the more specific regulations detailed in Part 47. Therefore, the delegation instructs the agency on a specific regulatory task by setting up the specific conditions for State banks to control or hold interest in subsidiaries that engage in activities normally limited to financial subsidiaries of national banks.
The statute provides detailed instructions regarding the content of the regulations. Subsections (b), (c), and (d) explicitly state that the regulations “shall include” specific provisions related to antitying, anticoercion, disclosures, advertising, and the separation of banking and nonbanking activities. These are not broad grants of power but specific tasks.
The statute clearly directs the “responsible agency” to approve merger transactions under specific conditions. It defines key terms and sets forth explicit criteria, limitations, and exceptions regarding interstate bank mergers. While the agency has discretion in applying these criteria, the statute provides specific regulatory tasks and constraints.
The statute provides specific instructions regarding the approval process for interstate bank mergers, including timelines, conditions, and limitations based on state laws and concentration limits. It also directs the “responsible agency” to consider Community Reinvestment Act compliance and the capital adequacy of the banks involved, providing clear regulatory tasks for the agency.
The statute clearly identifies a specific regulatory task – defining the conditions under which an insured State bank may control or hold interest in a subsidiary that engages in certain activities. Although the statute itself dictates some of the specifics (well capitalized, etc.), it contemplates that the Federal Reserve will develop more comprehensive regulations to give effect to the statute’s goals of safety and soundness with regards to these financial subsidiaries.
The statute refers to section 24a(c) for capital deductions and financial statement disclosure requirements and to section 24a(d) for financial and operational safeguards. This indicates that specific areas are targeted for regulatory attention. Therefore, although the statute does not lay out prescriptive guidance, its use of the term “complies” in conjunction with other sections shows specific authority delegation.
The statute directly addresses safety and soundness firewalls applicable to financial subsidiaries of banks, and mandates that insured state banks comply with specific requirements related to capital, financial statements, and operational safeguards if they wish to control or hold interests in subsidiaries engaged in activities permissible for national banks. This falls under “clearly instructing an agency on a specific regulatory task” since the statute creates a contingent permission (State bank may control/hold interest if conditions are met).
The statute gives the agencies specific tasks to achieve regulatory objectives. For example, Section (c) provides directions to the agencies to create a leverage limit. There are many areas of the statute where very clear instructions are given. This fits the specific delegation.
While the statute’s general purpose is to protect the deposit insurance fund by enabling prompt corrective action, it goes further by specifying several specific regulatory tasks for the agencies. For example, subsection (c) requires agencies to define capital categories (“well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” etc.) by regulation. Subsection (e)(2)(D) requires agencies to establish deadlines for capital restoration plans by regulation. Subsection (i) directs the Corporation to restrict the activities of undercapitalized institutions by regulation or order. Although open-ended terms such as “necessary” and “appropriate” are present, the direction for agency regulation and orders to act according to the statute’s specific instructions outweighs any general notion.
The statute contains numerous specific instructions on how the agency should regulate. For example, it mandates the inclusion of a leverage limit and risk-based capital requirement (subsection c(1)(A)), details the contents required of a capital restoration plan (subsection e(2)(B)), and specifies particular actions the agency shall take with significantly undercapitalized institutions, unless determined not to further the section’s purpose (subsection f(3)). Even the use of terms such as “appropriate” and “reasonable” occur within the context of specifically delegated regulatory actions and restrictions, and thus fall under specific authority as Hickman defines it.
The statute instructs the Bureau on a specific regulatory task: prescribing the manner and content of disclosure required under the section to ensure customers understand the risks. It provides a clear regulatory objective.
The delegation in subsection (c) directs the Bureau to prescribe the “manner and content of disclosure” required, ensuring customers understand risks related to foregoing federal deposit insurance. This is a specific regulatory task, fitting Hickman’s “Specific Authority” delegation. The statute clearly instructs the agency on a specific regulatory task related to disclosure.
The statute provides detailed instructions on the regulatory tasks. Subsection (c)(2) states: “Each appropriate Federal banking agency shall, by regulation, specify for each relevant capital measure the levels at which an insured depository institution is well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, and significantly undercapitalized.” This clearly instructs the agency on specific regulatory tasks with specific aims identified in the statute. Similarly, subsection (i) states: “To carry out the purpose of this section, the Corporation shall, by regulation or order”” (1) restrict the activities of any critically undercapitalized insured depository institution;”. These instructions are specific and aimed at addressing specific problems identified in the statute.
While the statute grants broad authority to regulate, it identifies very specific tasks and areas for regulation. For instance, subsection (c) demands the agencies to specify the capital levels for institutions to be categorized as “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” etc. The statute provides detailed instructions, and even uses terms like “appropriate” and “necessary” which Hickman identifies as features of specific authority delegations. Furthermore, subsection (e)(2)(D) mandates establishing deadlines for capital restoration plans.
The statute explicitly instructs the appropriate federal banking agencies to define capital categories by regulation, establish deadlines for capital restoration plans, and take specific actions related to undercapitalized institutions. It lays out what must be regulated and identifies regulatory tasks like specifying the ratio of tangible equity to total assets, restricting activities of critically undercapitalized institutions, prescribing regulations to carry out the law. These are specific regulatory tasks. While open-ended terms like “appropriate” and “necessary” are used, these occur within a framework of very specific regulatory directives.
The statute specifically instructs the appropriate Federal banking agencies on what to regulate (capital standards, capital categories, leverage limits, risk-based capital requirements, capital restoration plans), and how to regulate (including minimum acceptable capital levels, tangible equity percentages, and deadlines for capital restoration plans). While some discretion is afforded through the use of terms like “appropriate” and “reasonable,” the agencies are explicitly tasked with specific regulatory actions, filling clear gaps.
While the statute is broad, it provides very specific instructions regarding regulatory tasks and even defines specific areas to be addressed through regulation. Requirements to define capital categories, minimum levels, and the process for capital restoration plans clearly instruct agencies to fill in regulatory gaps. The statute uses language like “shall, by regulation, specify” which indicates a specific task assigned to the agency, which fits Specific Authority Delegations.
The statute provides specific instructions to the agencies, defining capital categories (well capitalized, adequately capitalized, etc.) and requiring them to establish a leverage limit and a risk-based capital requirement. While some discretion is granted in establishing additional relevant capital measures, the core regulatory task is clearly delineated.
The statute specifically instructs banking agencies to prescribe regulations to define capital measures, specify levels at which institutions are well-capitalized, adequately capitalized, etc., and to establish deadlines for capital restoration plans. While open-ended terms such as “appropriate” are used, the statute very specifically identifies tasks for the agency to complete through regulation. This level of specificity fits the Specific Authority Delegation category.
The statute gives very specific direction to the agencies regarding capital standards, restoration plans, and actions to take when institutions fall below capital thresholds. For instance, subsection (c) mandates agencies to include a leverage limit and a risk-based capital requirement in their capital standards, and subsection (e)(2)(D) directs the agency to establish specific deadlines for capital restoration plans. While “appropriate” and “necessary” are included, the regulatory task is clearly identified by Congress.
While broad, the statute provides clear instructions to the agencies regarding the specific regulatory task of establishing capital categories and taking corrective actions based on those categories. It defines “relevant capital measures” and requires agencies to specify levels for institutions to be considered “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” etc., along with detailing specific actions they shall and may take depending on those classifications. Though terms like “appropriate” and “necessary” are used, they are used within the context of specific actions related to regulatory capital measures.