Tag: occ

1
OCC Explores Special Purpose National Bank Charter for Fintech Companies
2
Bridging the Great Divide: Collaboration Considerations for Banks and Marketplace Lenders
3
Future of Fintech Regulations in the US
4
The OCC’s Request for Comments and Discussion on the Future of Fintech Regulation
5
FDIC and OCC Issue Final Guidance on Deposit Advance Loans
6
Fair Lending with a Twist: Discrimination Against White Males
7
Preemption Decision is Great News for National Banks and Federal Savings Associations

OCC Explores Special Purpose National Bank Charter for Fintech Companies

By Judith E. RinearsonAnthony R.G. NolanRebecca H. Laird and Jeremy M. McLaughlin

On December 2, 2016, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) announced its plans to move forward with a proposal to consider applications from financial technology (“fintech”) companies to receive charters as special purpose national banks. The OCC simultaneously released a white paper detailing the program. The OCC is seeking comments on its proposal, including responses to 13 specific questions listed in the paper. The announcement is potentially significant for the fintech sector, but questions remain as to whether a special bank charter would represent a fundamental change or merely an incremental enhancement. The comment period ends on January 15, 2017.

To read the full alert, click here.

Bridging the Great Divide: Collaboration Considerations for Banks and Marketplace Lenders

By Anthony R.G. Nolan, Edward Dartley, Sonia R. Gioseffi, Joseph A. Valenti, Christopher J. Scully and Christopher H. Bell

Marketplace lending has grown dramatically over the last several years, but it still remains a nascent industry. As it continues to expand its reach, players in the industry and the traditional banking/investment sector are discovering the mutual benefits of cooperation. While marketplace lending often has been heralded as a disruptor of traditional banking, industry participants are being presented with opportunities to collaborate with banking institutions as the industry matures.

To read the full alert, click here.

Future of Fintech Regulations in the US

By Charles Carter and Anthony (Tony) Yerry (ed. Cameron Abbott and Giles Whittaker)

Investment in financial technology (fintech) companies has surpassed US$24 billion worldwide since 2010, which consequently emphasises the importance of the relationship between fintech companies and regulators as they attempt to establish a culture of compliance while not stifling innovation.

As suggested by the industry experts according to The Wall Street Journal, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) may be the best federal agency to regulate fintech companies in the US. On March 31 the OCC during a speech at Harvard University on the innovation of the fintech industry released a white paper which attempts to launch formal discussions between regulators and the industry.

For more information and analysis of the OCC white paper please see K&L Gates’ e-alert here.

The OCC’s Request for Comments and Discussion on the Future of Fintech Regulation

By Charles P. Carter and Anthony (Tony) Yerry

U.S.-based digital banking startups have raised more than $10 billion since 2010, and investment in financial technology (“fintech”) companies has surpassed $24 billion worldwide. These firms are attempting to disrupt the banking value chain by providing services such as lending, bill payment, wealth management, and mobile banking. The significant federal and state regulation of these services create an obstacle for these fintech companies that technology companies in other vertical markets, such as social, internet infrastructure, and enterprise technology, do not face. It is critical for these companies, at the earliest stages of development, to understand how and when to engage with regulators and to build a culture of compliance, and it is critical for regulators to listen and adapt to the complaint from traditional banks and startups that the current regulatory framework stifles innovation and is unable to provide oversight for new forms of finance and banking.

To read the full alert, click here.

FDIC and OCC Issue Final Guidance on Deposit Advance Loans

By: David I. Monteiro, Michael A. Cumming

Recently, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) issued final supervisory guidance (FDIC guidance, OCC guidance) for financial institutions that offer so-called “deposit advance products.” By using these products, borrowers generally receive small-dollar, short-term loans and promise to repay them from the proceeds of their next paycheck (or benefit disbursement), which are direct-deposited into the borrower’s bank account. Notably, the regulators’ guidance applies to deposit advance products “regardless of how the extension of credit is structured” (e.g., as a loan or a line of credit). Read More

Fair Lending with a Twist: Discrimination Against White Males

By: Melanie Brody, Tori K. Shinohara

A Maryland-based community bank recently was the target of an OCC enforcement action alleging that the bank discriminated against white men. Specifically, the OCC alleged that First Community Bank discriminated on the basis of race and sex by imposing a ceiling on loan compensation paid by female and minority borrowers, but not by other borrowers. The Bank settled and agreed to make restitution to the aggrieved borrowers. Read More

Preemption Decision is Great News for National Banks and Federal Savings Associations

By: David L. Beam

Last Thursday, the California Supreme Court handed down what arguably is the most important decision on federal preemption for national banks since the Dodd-Frank Act was passed in mid-2010. The specific issue in Parks v. MBNA America Bank, N.A., 2012 Cal. LEXIS 5795 (Cal. June 21, 2012), was whether California could require national banks to place certain disclosures on credit card “convenience checks.” MBNA, the defendant, argued that the California law was preempted for national banks by the National Bank Act. The state court of appeals had disagreed. Read More

Copyright © 2018, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.