Database Search Results

While the statute provides specific powers to the FDIC, paragraph (a)(10) provides broad rulemaking authority to carry out the provisions of the chapter, lacking specific regulatory tasks but offering powers “necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter or of any other law which it has the responsibility of administering or enforcing.”

12 U.S.C. § 1819(a)(10) expressly authorizes the FDIC Board of Directors to prescribe rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of the chapter, making the relationship directly mandated. Further, 12 CFR Part 308’s authority section lists 12 U.S.C. § 1819 among the statutes that authorize the regulation.

The statute delineates very specific regulatory actions that the agency must take in response to various triggers, such as unsafe or unsound practices. It outlines a detailed process for termination of insurance, including specific notice requirements, hearing procedures, and potential for judicial review. Even the use of terms like ‘appropriate Federal banking agency’ doesn’t make it a general delegation, because it still refers to the process of carrying out actions mandated by Congress, not a wholesale grant of power to regulate deposit insurance as the agency sees fit.

12 U.S. Code § 1818 outlines specific actions the Board of Directors and other federal banking agencies must take under certain conditions regarding insured depository institutions. The statute directly mandates actions like notifying the primary regulator, serving written notice, providing statements of charges, and setting hearing dates related to the termination of insured status. Therefore, the relationship is directly mandated. While the Corporation may also be authorized to publish notice of such termination, the involuntary processes related to terminations are required.

While the statute is broad overall, it specifically instructs the FDIC (and other banking agencies) on actions they may take regarding termination of deposit insurance. For instance, subsection (a) outlines the process for both voluntary and involuntary termination, and subsection (b) details cease-and-desist proceedings. These are fairly specific regulatory tasks, even if the agency retains some discretion in implementation. The use of terms like “necessary” and “appropriate” within these sections still falls under the “Specific Authority” category according to Hickman’s framework, as they are connected to a specific regulatory task (terminating or preventing termination of deposit insurance). This is unlike simply giving an agency broad rulemaking power over the banking sector generally. Furthermore, given 12 U.S.C. § 1818 cites the regulation’s authority, they are linked.

12 U.S. Code § 1818 provides the FDIC with the authority to issue regulations related to the termination of insurance for depository institutions under certain conditions. It does not directly mandate any specific regulation but rather authorizes the agency to act when certain triggers are met (e.g., unsafe or unsound practices). This fits category (b), as the regulations are authorized by the statute, but the statute doesn’t mandate specific regulatory action. It enables, but doesn’t compel, the agency to create regulations. The presence of the authority section within the CFR also indicates that the regulation is authorized by this Statute.

The statute specifically instructs the FDIC (or other appropriate federal banking agency) to issue regulations regarding termination of insured status, cease and desist orders, removal and prohibition of certain activities, and compliance with monetary transaction recordkeeping. While some terms might be open-ended, the regulatory tasks are specifically identified, making it a Specific Authority delegation.

Title 12 U.S. Code § 1818 is directly cited as authority for 12 CFR Part 48, as seen in the regulation’s Authority section.

The statute instructs the Board of Directors, part of the FDIC, to determine the insured status of depository institutions based on specific criteria such as unsafe or unsound practices, capital guidelines, and violations of laws or regulations. The statute further instructs them to set procedures for hearings, temporary suspensions, and other actions related to the termination of insurance. While not using the precise words “appropriate,” “reasonable,” or “necessary,” the numerous direct instructions to the Board to take certain action indicates a high level of direction.

The statute authorizes the FDIC to issue regulations regarding the termination of insured status for depository institutions, but it doesn’t mandate any specific regulation beyond setting out procedural requirements. The regulation referenced provides liquidity risk measurement standards, a topic related to the general safety and soundness concerns addressed in 12 U.S.C. § 1818.

12 U.S.C. § 1818 provides explicit and specific guidance to the relevant agencies on the regulation of depository institutions. It identifies specific practices, conditions, and violations that warrant action and outlines procedures for enforcement. While some terms like “unsafe or unsound practices” are open-ended, the statute focuses on precise regulatory tasks and specific gaps.

12 U.S.C. § 1818(s)(1) states, “Each appropriate Federal banking agency shall prescribe regulations requiring insured depository institutions to establish and maintain procedures reasonably designed to assure and monitor the compliance of such depository institutions with the requirements of subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31.” Since this part of the statute explicitly instructs the agencies to issue regulations, the relationship is directly mandated. There are also multiple other sections in the Statute that directly references regulation.

The statute provides specific regulatory tasks, such as setting notice requirements, issuing cease and desist orders, and establishing procedures for compliance with monetary transaction recordkeeping, all under defined conditions related to the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions. While discretion exists in some areas, the law clearly instructs agencies on regulatory duties. The use of phrases like “appropriate,” “necessary,” and “may order” do not detract from its specific nature.

The statute authorizes, but does not mandate, specific actions by the FDIC and other federal banking agencies, such as terminating insurance or issuing cease-and-desist orders under certain conditions. It sets forth specific triggers and procedures for these actions, but the agencies retain discretion in many instances.

The statute clearly outlines specific circumstances””unsafe or unsound practices, violations of law, etc.””under which the agency (FDIC) is authorized to act, providing instructions on a specific regulatory task, even using open-ended terms like “unsafe or unsound practice.”

The statute authorizes the FDIC to terminate insurance under specific conditions (unsafe/unsound practices, violations), but it doesn’t mandate regulation in all cases. The agency has discretion.

The statute instructs the agencies to prescribe regulations requiring insured depository institutions to establish and maintain procedures to comply with requirements under subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31. The statute provides a clear, specific regulatory task, even if it uses the general term “reasonably designed”.

The statute authorizes the FDIA to take certain actions regarding insured depository institutions, but it does not mandate specific regulations for every aspect of their operation. The creation and implementation of fair credit reporting regulations stem from a broader grant of authority to ensure safe and sound banking practices.

While 12 U.S.C. § 1818 extensively details procedures for terminating deposit insurance, including notice requirements, hearing processes, judicial review, and specific considerations like money laundering offenses or low-to-moderate income housing loans, it also delegates to the ‘appropriate Federal banking agency’ and the ‘Board of Directors’ the authority to make findings and orders to effectuate termination, to set notice requirements to depositors, to set capital requirements and issue penalties, and to create rule and regulations to facilitate implementation. It uses open-ended terms such as “necessary and appropriate”, even though specific regulatory tasks are identified.

12 U.S. Code § 1818 outlines specific powers and responsibilities of the FDIC and other federal banking agencies regarding the termination of deposit insurance. While it doesn’t mandate specific regulations beyond the scope already delegated in the statute, it authorizes the FDIC to issue orders and take actions related to this termination process. The statute’s existence necessitates regulations for its implementation and enforcement.

This statute specifically outlines actions the FDIC and other agencies shall take in particular scenarios, making it a specific authority delegation. The statute outlines the procedures that agencies must follow when terminating deposit insurance or addressing unsafe practices, setting clear instructions that go beyond simply authorizing rulemaking. Section 1818 is providing directions about how an agency should act in certain circumstances, and the Dodd Frank Act also lists 12 USC 1818.

12 U.S. Code § 1818 explicitly grants authority to the FDIC Board of Directors and other federal banking agencies to take specific actions regarding the termination of deposit insurance, including issuing regulations related to temporary orders, notification procedures, and corrective actions. The existence of this statute directly empowers the agency to act, and Part 44 is issued under this authority.

Subsection (s) provides a specific regulatory task, instructing the agency to prescribe regulations mandating procedures for institutions to comply with monetary transaction recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Although terms like “reasonably designed” leave some discretion, the statute identifies a specific regulatory gap and instructs the agency on how to fill it.

The regulation, 12 CFR Part 353, regarding Suspicious Activity Reports, is directly mandated by 12 U.S.C. § 1818, specifically subsection (s), which requires “appropriate Federal banking agency” to prescribe regulations to establish and maintain procedures reasonably designed to assure and monitor the compliance of such depository institutions with the requirements of subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31.

The statute provides detailed instructions on how the FDIC should handle termination of insurance, including unsafe/unsound practices (a)(2), hearing procedures (a)(3), publication of notices (a)(6), temporary insurance extensions (a)(7), cease and desist powers (b), removal authority (e), and more. The statue outlines specific processes that the agency must follow and provides enforcement mechanisms for the banking agencies. While discretion is sometimes mentioned with terms like “necessary” and “appropriate,” it’s still tied to specific regulatory tasks and corrective actions.

12 U.S.C. § 1818 directly addresses the termination of insurance status, both voluntary and involuntary, for insured depository institutions. The statute outlines the conditions, procedures, and authorities involved in terminating deposit insurance, making it a direct mandate.

While broad, the statute explicitly instructs the FDIC to address specific risks like unsafe/unsound practices or violations of laws/regulations and empowers them to take enforcement actions, which necessitates the creation of regulations further detailing specific activities permitted or restricted for insured institutions. Thus, the regulations specifying permissible activities connect to specific instructions within the statue.

12 U.S.C. § 1818 authorizes the FDIC to regulate insured depository institutions, including actions related to the termination of insured status and cease-and-desist proceedings. While the statute grants authority, it doesn’t directly mandate specific regulations outlined in 12 CFR Part 362; rather, it enables the agency to implement regulations it deems necessary and appropriate for safety, soundness, and depositor protection, such as those regarding the activities of insured state banks and savings associations.

While the statute is lengthy, it outlines quite specific regulatory tasks such as termination of insurance, cease-and-desist proceedings, and removal of institution-affiliated parties. It specifies the conditions under which these actions are to be taken, and often uses terms like “appropriate,” “necessary,” etc., which, according to Hickman, still indicates a specific task.

The statute directly mandates the agencies to take specific actions related to terminating insurance, issuing cease-and-desist orders, and enforcing regulations, specifying the conditions and procedures for these actions. For example, it directly states what the Board of Directors shall do under certain findings.

While broad in scope regarding enforcement and remedial actions, the statute specifically instructs the appropriate Federal Banking Agency on what regulatory tasks or gaps need to be addressed. This involves defining “unsafe or unsound practices,” responding to violations, and ensuring the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions. This constitutes specific authority.

The statute authorizes the FDIC to create regulations and take action regarding the termination of insured depository institution status under specific circumstances. It does not directly mandate specific regulations, but authorizes the agency to act within defined parameters.

The statute clearly identifies specific regulatory actions (e.g., serving written notice, providing statements of charges, scheduling hearings, issuing orders) the Board of Directors must or may undertake given certain findings about the depository institution. These actions are directly tied to ensuring the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions and protecting depositors. Even where terms like “necessary” or “appropriate” are used, they are cabined to actions addressing identified unsafe/unsound practices or violations.

This statute directly mandates the termination of insurance status for depository institutions under specific conditions, like unsafe practices or regulatory violations.

12 U.S.C. § 1818 explicitly empowers the FDIC to prescribe regulations to effectuate the purposes of this section. While the term “purposes” may seem broad, the statute meticulously outlines specific regulatory actions the FDIC can take against insured depository institutions for unsafe practices or violations, such as issuing cease-and-desist orders, terminating insurance, and prescribing compliance procedures for monetary transactions. This directs the agency on a specific regulatory task/gap using “appropriate” and “necessary” terms.

12 U.S. Code § 1818 authorizes the FDIC (through its Board of Directors and other agencies) to take certain actions related to insured depository institutions, including termination of insurance and cease-and-desist orders. The regulations found in 12 CFR Part 334 relate to fair credit reporting and identity theft, topics related to the FDIC’s mandate to ensure the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions and protect depositors. Thus, the regulations are authorized but not mandated by the statute.

While not specifying particular regulatory tasks, 12 U.S.C. § 1818 offers “Specific Authority Delegations” by instructing the FDIC and “appropriate Federal banking agency” on specific regulatory actions and gaps related to the conditions for involuntary termination of status as an insured depository institution. Open-ended terms like “appropriate” and “necessary” are used within the statute, which according to Hickman’s framework is still considered “Specific Authority”.

While the statute mandates certain actions by the FDIC and other regulatory agencies, it does not directly mandate the creation of regulations. Instead, it authorizes the agencies to take actions based on their determination of unsafe or unsound practices, conditions, or violations. The accompanying regulation 12 CFR Part 338 (Fair Housing) isn’t directly mandated, as the statute mainly concerns itself with setting up a system for the termination of insured status based upon specific determinations of risk and violation. The relationship is that the statute allows for action by the Board which could then be defined through regulation to better enforce the statutes intention.

This statute contains a mixture of Specific Authority Delegations and General Authority Delegations. However, it tends to lean slightly more towards Specific Authority. The statute gives the FDIC specific regulatory tasks, such as determining unsafe practices, setting standards, and terminating insurance and also contains broad rulemaking authority.

12 U.S.C. 1818 directly mandates certain actions by the FDIC (acting through its Board of Directors) and other federal banking agencies. The statute lays out specific procedures and requirements for terminating deposit insurance and taking enforcement actions. The regulation provided (12 CFR Part 344) includes regulations requiring insured depository institutions to establish and maintain procedures reasonably designed to assure and monitor the compliance of such depository institutions with the requirements of subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31. The Statute directly mentions some enforcement actions and provides authority to make regulations.

The statute grants the “appropriate Federal banking agency” (which includes the FDIC through definition) the authority to prevent unsafe and unsound practices and address violations, but it does not specify particular regulations related to derivatives beyond the broad mandate of safety and soundness and compliance with laws and regulations. The statute gives tools and general aims, but not a specific directive to regulate derivatives or FX transactions in a particular manner. Therefore, Part 349 is created under a general authority delegation.

While 12 U.S. Code § 1818 doesn’t directly mandate the creation of 12 CFR Part 349, it does authorize the appropriate federal banking agencies, including the FDIC, to issue cease and desist orders and take other enforcement actions against insured depository institutions engaging in unsafe or unsound practices or violating laws and regulations. 12 CFR Part 349, which deals with derivatives and retail foreign exchange transactions, falls under the umbrella of regulations necessary to ensure the safe and sound operation of these institutions and protect the deposit insurance fund. Therefore, the relationship is authorized but not mandated.

This statute delegates specific tasks, directing the FDIC to take certain actions (termination of insurance, issuing cease and desist orders, etc.) under particular circumstances, relating to insured depository institutions. This goes beyond general rulemaking authority and specifically instructs the agency on how to address certain regulatory gaps. For example, the authority to issue cease-and-desist orders based on ‘unsafe or unsound practices’ (even though somewhat open-ended) still provides instruction on what to regulate. The authority to prescribe regulations requiring institutions to maintain procedures for monetary transaction recordkeeping also counts as specific authority. The same goes for authority to take enforcement action based on recommendations to the agencies and authorities to prescribe rules as may be necessary to effectuate purposes of the subsection. While the statute uses terms like ‘appropriate’ and ‘necessary’, the regulatory tasks are sufficiently defined to be considered specific.

The regulation (12 CFR Part 325) explicitly cites 12 U.S.C. 1818 as one of its authorities. Therefore, the regulation is directly mandated by the statute.

12 U.S.C. § 1818 gives the “appropriate Federal banking agency” specific regulatory tasks, including prescribing regulations for insured depository institutions to comply with currency transaction reporting requirements under subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31.

12 U.S.C. § 1818(s) directly mandates that each appropriate Federal banking agency shall prescribe regulations requiring insured depository institutions to establish and maintain procedures reasonably designed to assure and monitor compliance with the requirements of subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31. 12 CFR Part 326 implements this directive.

The statute provides specific instructions to the Board of Directors regarding the process for terminating deposit insurance, specifying triggers, procedures, and factors to be considered. Even though terms such as “unsafe or unsound practices” are used, the statute is clearly instructing the agency on how to regulate in specific situations.

The statute authorizes the FDIC to take certain actions regarding the termination of deposit insurance, but does not mandate specific regulations. Regulations would be needed to flesh out the details of the processes described in the statute.

The statute provides specific guidance to the appropriate federal banking agencies, instructing them on procedures for terminating insured status, issuing cease-and-desist orders, removal and prohibition authority, and ensuring compliance with monetary transaction recordkeeping and report requirements. Even the use of terms like “appropriate” falls under the “Specific Authority” category.

12 U.S.C. § 1818 directly mandates regulations regarding the termination of insured depository institution status.