Debate Over Extension of Bush Tax Cuts Continues
On Thursday, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told House Democrats at a closed door meeting that the House would vote before the end of the year on extending the Bush tax cuts for only those individuals making less than $250,000. However, even if such a measure were to pass in the House, it is unclear whether the Senate will agree to such a vote. There is still the possibility the bill may not pass the House if Republicans are able to successfully pass a procedural response, known as a “motion to recommit,” that could force a House vote on a full extension of the Bush tax cuts. According to sources, Pelosi told President Barack Obama that House Democrats remain firmly committed to allowing Bush-era tax cuts to expire for earners making more than $250,000, which complicates the Administration’s efforts to reach a compromise with Senate Republicans.
Preview of Next Year’s Budget Fight
On Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced he would oppose the pending omnibus appropriations bill, thereby forcing Congress to rely on another stopgap “continuing resolution,” or CR, to keep the government funded after December 3. If Republicans are able to block the omnibus spending bill, it would set up an early confrontation with President Obama next year over not just deeper cuts from the President’s 2011 budget but also tens of billions of dollars in rescissions from prior years. The White House is seeking a continuing funding resolution which would cover the next 10 months of the fiscal year until September 30, which would deny House Republicans a chance to defund portions of the healthcare bill early next year.
Fed Orders New Stress Tests
On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve announced plans to scrutinize the nation’s top 19 banks through a second round of “stress tests.” The stress tests will require the bank-holding companies to submit capital plans by early 2011 proving their capability to handle losses under a set of conditions including “adverse” economic conditions and continuing real estate-related problems. In its announcement, the Fed said it plans to perform such reviews regularly on an ongoing basis. The Fed also issued a road map for banks that want to raise dividends or buy back stock saying firms must show they have sufficient capital in place to withstand losses over the next two years and demonstrate an ability to satisfy new, tougher global capital requirements.
(more…)
A number of banks have recently been examining the possibility of raising capital through the sale of a minority interest in a subsidiary set up to hold bank owned real estate such as bank headquarters and branches.
Part 325 of the FDIC Rules and Regulations indicates that Tier 1 Capital includes minority interests in equity capital accounts of those subsidiaries that have been consolidated for the purpose of computing regulatory capital, (except that minority interests which fail to provide meaningful capital support are excluded from the definition). Stock held by minority shareholders in a bank controlled subsidiary whose assets are consolidated with those of the bank are not generally recognized as equity capital under GAAP, but the bank regulatory agencies have in the past counted it as regulatory capital.
We have been informed by the FDIC that the current regulatory view of such transactions is not favorable. Their position is that subsidiaries typically are not normally formed for the sole intent of raising capital, and that minority interests usually arise when a bank acquires a pre-existing subsidiary. From a corporate perspective, the FDIC is currently taking the position it will not be allowing banks to transfer assets to a subsidiary for the sole intent of raising temporary capital, particularly if the investors have a preferred claim or return on such assets. Accordingly, institutions looking to raise capital are unlikely to find any relief by selling interests in the bank’s existing owned real estate.
Short-Term Planning for Recovery and Survival
(This post was authored by Walt Moeling and Dustin Hall. A version of this post originally appeared in the August 2009 issue of the ABA’s Community Banker magazine.)
The grim economic prognoses we continue to hear about have an immediate impact in the bank board room. Boards must think about short-term planning for recovery and survival because virtually no bank is wholly immune from the current recession. Although the problems may have started with residential real estate in the Sunbelt, they have gone much beyond that now, impacting banks throughout the country.
As a director you must plan for both long-term and short-term. Long-term planning is tremendously important, and we hope to make it to the “long-term,” but short-term planning is critical today.
Short-term planning in this context deals with the reality of today’s marketplace. The focus is not on earnings or even stock value, two traditional focal points for planning. Instead, the focus is on capital management, liquidity, and asset quality.
Capital Management
Your short-term capital planning in the face of mounting losses cannot focus on today or yesterday; it must focus on tomorrow. You must ask: Where are we going? What will happen if housing prices drop for another two and a half years, as predicted by some? Can our borrowers sustain a more prolonged recession? If not, where will our capital be three, six, and nine months from now? In essence, you must stress test your bank to see how far it can go.
A real problem for directors is assuming that capital today is as readily available as it has been for the past 15 years, or that they can sell the bank if there is a real problem. Unfortunately, there is no public market, and virtually no private equity, for bank stock. Those sources are presently closed, shall we say, for repair. Instead, short-term capital is likely to be found only within the boardroom and from family and friends.
Although the trust preferred securities (“TPS”) market has been quiet (or non-existent) for the past few years, many bank holding companies have issued TPS in the past to take advantage of the hybrid capital treatment afforded to TPS by the Federal Reserve. In 2005, the Federal Reserve revised its rules permitting the inclusion of a limited amount of TPS in the Tier 1 capital to provide stricter quantitative limits. Under the 2005 rule, which became effective on March 31, 2009, bank holding companies may include TPS in Tier 1 capital in an amount up to 25% of all core capital elements less goodwill and any associated deferred tax liability. Core capital elements include common shareholders’ equity, noncumulative perpetual preferred stock (including preferred stock issued pursuant to the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)), and minority interests directly issued by a consolidated U.S. depository institution or foreign bank subsidiary. Any TPS issued in excess of this limit may be included in Tier 2 capital.
Prior to March 31, 2009, bank holding companies were permitted to calculate the limit for TPS without deducting goodwill and associated deferred tax liability from Tier 1 capital. The regulators are now taking note that some bank holding companies with outstanding TPS have not revised their Tier 1 calculations to comply with the newly-effective rule. If your bank has a holding company with outstanding TPS, be sure that you are limiting the TPS component of Tier 1 capital to 25% of core capital elements less goodwill and any associated deferred tax liability.
In addition, in the current economic environment, many bank holding companies are experiencing deterioration in capital. When the core capital elements of Tier 1 capital decline, the amount of TPS that may be included in Tier 1 capital also declines, thereby further reducing a bank holding company’s leverage ratio. When calculating capital ratios, bank holding companies must remember to re-evaluate the inclusion of TPS in Tier 1 capital as capital declines.
We are having discussions with clients regarding the possibility of issuing FDIC-guaranteed debt under the TLGP’s Debt Guarantee Program at the holding company level and using the proceeds of that debt to increase the capital of the bank subsidiary. This is particularly attractive for banks that are eligible to report their risk-based capital positions on a bank-only basis. (The Federal Reserve’s risk-based capital measures are generally applied on a bank-only basis for bank holding companies with consolidated assets of less than $500 million.)
Permissible Use for BHC FDIC-Guaranteed Debt
The FDIC’s Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) explicitly permits a bank holding company to use the proceeds from a guaranteed debt issuance to purchase additional shares of bank stock.
Need to Apply to FDIC for Approval
In our experience, however, most bank holding companies for community banks had no, or very limited amounts of, senior unsecured debt outstanding as of September 30, 2008. As a result, the bank holding company will have to file a letter application with the FDIC and, if different, the federal banking regulator for its largest subsidiary bank to establish an FDIC-guaranteed debt limit. The letter application must describe the details of the request, provide a summary of the applicant’s strategic operating plan, and describe the proposed use of the debt proceeds.