PC / Ivory Vellum Carnival 35X23 / 80 / 35X23 Carnival Vellum / Ivory PC

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

PC / Ivory Vellum Carnival 35X23 / 80 / 35X23 Carnival Vellum / Ivory PC PC / Ivory Vellum Carnival 35x23 / 80 PRAtt’s JOU PRAtt’s R N A L OF B A NK R UPTCY L UPTCY A W LEXISNEXIS® A.S. PRAtt™ FEBRUARY/MARCH 2015 EDITOR’S NOTE: CROSS-BORDER MATTERS Steven A. Meyerowitz VOLUME 11 NUMBER 2 VOLUME 11 CROSS-BORDER RESOLUTION OF BANKING GROUPS: INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES AND U.S. PERSPECTIVES—PART IV Paul L. Lee THE LOOMING SHADOW IN THE PRC PROPERTY MARKET Christopher W. McFadzean and David Richardson IF IT WALKS LIKE A DUCK … IN RE DuckwoRTH: ANOTHER WARNING TO LENDERS TO TAKE CARE IN DRAFTING SECURITY DOCUMENTS Jeffrey Close, Mark Silverman, and Bryan Jacobson FEBRUARY/MARCH 2015 FEBRUARY/MARCH QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PUBLICATION? For questions about the Editorial Content appearing in these volumes or reprint permission, please call: Kent K. B. Hanson, J.D. at ........................................................ 1-800-424-0651 ext. 3207 Email: ........................................................................................... [email protected] For assistance with replacement pages, shipments, billing or other customer service matters, please call: Customer Services Department at . (800) 833-9844 Outside the United States and Canada, please call . (518) 487-3000 Fax Number . (518) 487-3584 Customer Service Web site . http://www.lexisnexis.com/custserv/ For information on other Matthew Bender publications, please call Your account manager or . (800) 223-1940 Outside the United States and Canada, please call . (518) 487-3000 Library of Congress Card Number: 80-68780 ISBN: 978-0-7698-7846-1 (print) ISBN: 978-0-7698-7988-8 (eBook) Cite this publication as: [author name], [article title], [vol. no.] PRATT’S JOURNAL OF BANKRUPTCY LAW [page number] (LexisNexis A.S. Pratt); Example: Patrick E. Mears, The Winds of Change Intensify over Europe: Recent European Union Actions Firmly Embrace the “Rescue and Recovery” Culture for Business Recovery, 10 PRATT’S JOURNAL OF BANKRUPTCY LAW 349 (LexisNexis A.S. Pratt) This publication is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. LexisNexis and the Knowledge Burst logo are registered trademarks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., used under license. A.S. Pratt is a trademark of Reed Elsevier Properties SA, used under license. Copyright © 2015 Reed Elsevier Properties SA, used under license by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. No copyright is claimed by LexisNexis, Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., or Reed Elsevier Properties SA, in the text of statutes, regulations, and excerpts from court opinions quoted within this work. Permission to copy material may be licensed for a fee from the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, Mass. 01923, telephone (978) 750-8400. An A.S. Pratt™ Publication Editorial Offices 630 Central Ave., New Providence, NJ 07974 (908) 464-6800 201 Mission St., San Francisco, CA 94105-1831 (415) 908-3200 www.lexisnexis.com (2015-Pub.4789) Editor-in-Chief & Board of Editors EDITOR-IN-CHIEF STEVEN A. MEYEROWITZ President, Meyerowitz Communications Inc. BOARD OF EDITORS Scott L. Baena Thomas W. Coffey Matthew W. Levin Bilzin Sumberg Baena Tucker Ellis & West LLP Alston & Bird LLP Price & Axelrod LLP Leslie A. Berkoff Michael L. Cook Patrick E. Mears Moritt Hock & Hamroff Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP Barnes & Thornburg LLP LLP Ted A. Berkowitz Mark G. Douglas Alec P. Ostrow Farrell Fritz, P.C. Jones Day Stevens & Lee P.C. Michael L. Bernstein Timothy P. Duggan Deryck A. Palmer Arnold & Porter LLP Stark & Stark Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP Andrew P. Brozman Gregg M. Ficks N. Theodore Zink, Jr. Clifford Chance US LLP Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Chadbourne & Parke LLP Bass LLP Kevin H. Buraks Mark J. Friedman Portnoff Law Associates, DLA Piper Ltd. Peter S. Clark II Robin E. Keller Reed Smith LLP Lovells PRATT’S JOURNAL OF BANKRUPTCY LAW is published eight times a year by Matthew Bender & Company., Inc. Copyright 2015 Reed Elsevier Properties SA., used under license by Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this journal may be reproduced in any form—by microfilm, xerography, or otherwise—or incorporated into any information retrieval system without the written permission of the copyright owner. For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from Pratt’s Journal of Bankruptcy Law, please access www.copyright.com or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides licenses and registration for a variety of users. For subscription information and customer service, call 1-800-833-9844. Direct any editorial inquires and send any material for publication to Steven A. Meyerowitz, Editor-in-Chief, Meyerowitz Communications Inc., PO Box 7080, Miller Place, NY 11764, [email protected], 631.331.3908. Material for publication is welcomed—articles, decisions, or other items of interest to bankers, officers of financial iii institutions, and their attorneys. This publication is designed to be accurate and authoritative, but neither the publisher nor the authors are rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services in this publication. If legal or other expert advice is desired, retain the services of an appropriate professional. The articles and columns reflect only the present considerations and views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated, any of the former or present clients of the authors or their firms or organizations, or the editors or publisher. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Pratt’s Journal of Bankruptcy Law, LexisNexis Matthew Bender, 630 Central Avenue, New Providence, NJ 07974. iv CROSS-BORDER RESOLUTION OF BANKING GROUPS—PART IV Cross-Border Resolution of Banking Groups: International Initiatives and U.S. Perspectives—Part IV Paul L. Lee* This is the fourth part of a five-part article analyzing efforts to create effective resolution regimes for systemically important cross-border banking institutions. Parts I and II of this article discussed the promulgation of the Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions by the Financial Stability Board and various national and regional efforts in the European Union aimed at implementation of the Key Attributes. Part III discussed the resolution regimes applicable to the U.S. operations of foreign banking groups and the conformance of these regimes with the Key Attributes. This Part IV discusses the resolution regime applicable to the cross-border operations of U.S. banking institutions under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and the conformance of that regime with the Key Attributes. Part V will discuss the new resolution regime under Title II of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and its application to the cross-border resolution of large U.S. banking groups. INTRODUCTION Ideas have consequences or so the savants say. Of all the ideas to have emerged (or re-emerged) from the 2007–2009 financial crisis, none holds the promise of greater consequences for the financial sector than that of “too big to fail.” Indeed, the idea of “too big to fail” has already had significant consequences. In the United States, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) has imposed an enhanced prudential regime on systemically important financial institutions and created a special resolution regime for such institutions.1 At the international level, the Financial Stability Board (the “FSB”) has designated a set of global systemically important banking institutions for heightened regulation and has adopted the Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions (the “Key Attributes”) to promote international convergence of resolution regimes * Paul L. Lee is of counsel at Debevoise & Plimpton LLP and a member of the firm’s Financial Institutions Group. He is also a member of the adjunct faculty at Columbia Law School. Mr. Lee can be reached at [email protected]. 1 Dodd-Frank Act, Pub. L. No. 111-203, Titles I & II, 124 Stat. 1376, 1391–1520 (2010). 59 PRATT’S JOURNAL OF BANKRUPTCY LAW for such institutions.2 Pursuant to a directive from the G20, the FSB has also undertaken the task of monitoring the progress that is being made at the national level in addressing “too big to fail.”3 The savants generally agree that one of the most important measures for addressing “too big to fail” is the implementation of credible resolution regimes for systemically important financial institutions. A credible resolution regime is generally regarded as one that would permit a resolution of such an institution without destabilizing the financial system and without requiring a “bailout” of the institution by the government.4 Part I of this article discussed the promulgation and implementation of the Key Attributes by the FSB. Part II of this article discussed national and regional efforts in the European Union aimed at creating credible resolution regimes for financial institutions. Part III of this article discussed the resolution regimes applicable to the U.S. operations of foreign banking groups and their conformance with the Key Attributes. This Part IV analyzes the resolution regime applicable to U.S. banks and their cross-border operations under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (the “FDIA”) and its conformance with the Key Attributes. Part V will analyze the new resolution regime established under Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act for systemically important financial institutions. Since its creation in 1933, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) has acquired substantial experience in resolving failed banking institutions under the FDIA, although it has had only rare occasion to utilize these powers in the case of large banking institutions.5 Title II of the 2 See Press Release, FSB, FSB announces policy measures to address systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs) and names initial group of global SIFIs (Nov.
Recommended publications
  • Overview of the Fdic As Conservator Or Receiver
    September 26, 2008 OVERVIEW OF THE FDIC AS CONSERVATOR OR RECEIVER This memorandum is an overview of the receivership and conservatorship authority of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”). In view of the many and complex specific issues that may arise in this context, this memorandum is necessarily an overview, but it does give particular reference to counterparty issues that might arise in the case of a relatively large complex bank such as a significant regional bank and outlines elements of the FDIC framework which differ from a corporate bankruptcy. This memorandum has three parts: (1) background on the legal framework governing FDIC resolutions, highlighting changes and developments since the 1990s; (2) an outline of six distinctive aspects of the FDIC approach with comparison to the bankruptcy law provisions; and (3) a final section illustrating issues and uncertainties in the FDIC resolutions process through a more detailed review of two examples – treatment of loan securitizations and participations, and standby letters of credit.1 Relevant additional materials include: the pertinent provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance (the "FDI") Act2 and FDIC rules3, statements of policy4 and advisory opinions;5 the FDIC Resolution Handbook6 which reflects the FDIC's high level description of the receivership process, including a contrast with the bankruptcy framework; recent speeches of FDIC Chairman 1 While not exhaustive, these discussions are meant to be exemplary of the kind of analysis that is appropriate in analyzing any transaction with a bank counterparty. 2 Esp. Section 11 et seq., http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/1000- 1200.html#1000sec.11 3 Esp.
    [Show full text]
  • Banking and Insurance - Should Ever the Twain Meet? Emeric Fischer William & Mary Law School
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 1992 Banking and Insurance - Should Ever the Twain Meet? Emeric Fischer William & Mary Law School Repository Citation Fischer, Emeric, "Banking and Insurance - Should Ever the Twain Meet?" (1992). Faculty Publications. 485. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/485 Copyright c 1992 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs Emeric Fischer* Banking and Insurance-Should Ever the Twain Meet? TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction . 727 II. Evolution of Banking in the United States . 731 A. Banking Prior to the Civil War .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 731 1. From the Revolutionary War to 1836 . 731 2. The State Free Banking System, 1837 to 1864 . 733 B. The National Free Banking System, 1864 to 1933 . 734 1. Prior to 1913 . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 734 2. Mter 1913 . 735 III. Regulation of Banking . 737 A. The Glass-Steagall Act and the FDIC . 737 B. Policy Goals of Federal Regulation. 738 1. The Broad Goals . 739 2. General Constraints on Federal Banking Policy . 739 C. The Policy Implementing Tools (Regulatory Mechanisms) . 741 1. Entry Restrictions .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 741 2. Capitalization Requirements..................... 743 3. Limitation of and Prohibition Against Specific Activities. 744 4. Restrictions on Mfiliations and Geographic Expansion . 749 5. Lending and Borrowing Limitations . 750 * R. Hugh and Nolie A. Haynes Professor of Law, William and Mary School of Law. B.S. University of South Carolina 1951; J.D. 1963 and M.L.&T. 1964 College of William and Mary, Marshall-Wythe School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Barriers and Toward a Level Playing Field
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by NSU Works Nova Law Review Volume 9, Issue 1 1984 Article 1 Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Barriers and Toward a Level Playing Field Scott W. Dunlap∗ ∗ Copyright c 1984 by the authors. Nova Law Review is produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press (bepress). https://nsuworks.nova.edu/nlr Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Barriers and Toward a Level Playing Field Scott W. Dunlap Abstract The Florida banking market is one of the most coveted in the country. KEYWORDS: Banking, Florida, Legal Barriers Dunlap: Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Interstate Banking Developments in Florida: Pushing Through Legal Barriers and Toward a Level Playing Field Scott W. Dunlap* I. Introduction The Florida banking market is one of the most coveted in the country.1 The Sunshine State is one of the fastest growing states in the nation,2 and this growth provides increased deposits in the State's' banks. As long as this growth continues, new businesses which need funds to begin operations will be attracted to Florida. In short, the in- flux of people and businesses into the state insure that Florida will re- main a deposit-rich state, requiring large amounts of capital to fund its continued growth. Because banks depend on both obtaining deposits and making loans for their existence, the Florida banking market is quite attractive. Until recently, Florida excluded out-of-state banks and bank hold- ing companies3 from its retail banking market.4 This did not mean that * B.S., University of North Carolina; J.D., University of Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Property Rights and the Fifth Amendment: FIRREA's Cross-Guarantee Reexamined, 33 Wm
    William & Mary Law Review Volume 33 (1991-1992) Issue 1 Drug Testing in the Workplace Article 13 October 1991 Of Property Rights and the Fifth Amendment: FIRREA's Cross- Guarantee Reexamined Jennifer B. Arlin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr Part of the Banking and Finance Law Commons Repository Citation Jennifer B. Arlin, Of Property Rights and the Fifth Amendment: FIRREA's Cross-Guarantee Reexamined, 33 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 293 (1991), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol33/ iss1/13 Copyright c 1991 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr OF PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THE FIFTH AMENDMENT: FIRREA'S CROSS-GUARANTEE REEXAMINED A law ... that takes property from A. and gives it to B.: it is against all reason and justice, for a people to intrust a legislature with such powers; and therefore, it cannot be presumed that they have done it.' In recent years, the troubled economy of the United States has had an extremely adverse effect on the banking industry. Two years ago, problem banks in our nation numbered 1600,2 and although the number of banks in immediate danger has declined,3 observers anticipate a continuation of bank failures into the mid- 1990's.4 According to the Bush administration, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's (FDIC) bank insurance fund, the fund designated to bail the nation out of the savings and loan crisis, 5 will lose $6.1 billion by 1993 even if insurance premiums are doubled.6 The possibility of a publicly financed bailout is a real worry to a presidential administration that has repeatedly stated its intention to avoid the passage of new tax laws.7 With the 1.
    [Show full text]
  • By:Bill Medley
    By: Bill Medley Highways of Commerce Central Banking and The U.S. Payments System By: Bill Medley Highways of Commerce Central Banking and The U.S. Payments System Published by the Public Affairs Department of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City 1 Memorial Drive • Kansas City, MO 64198 Diane M. Raley, publisher Lowell C. Jones, executive editor Bill Medley, author Casey McKinley, designer Cindy Edwards, archivist All rights reserved, Copyright © 2014 Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior consent of the publisher. First Edition, July 2014 The Highways of Commerce • III �ontents Foreword VII Chapter One A Calculus of Chaos: Commerce in Early America 1 Chapter Two “Order out of Confusion:” The Suffolk Bank 7 Chapter Three “A New Era:” The Clearinghouse 19 Chapter Four “A Famine of Currency:” The Panic of 1907 27 Chapter Five “The Highways of Commerce:” The Road to a Central Bank 35 Chapter Six “A problem…of great novelty:” Building a New Clearing System 45 Chapter Seven Bank Robbers and Bolsheviks: The Par Clearance Controversy 55 Chapter Eight “A Plump Automatic Bookkeeper:” The Rise of Banking Automation 71 Chapter Nine Control and Competition: The Monetary Control Act 83 Chapter Ten The Fed’s Air Force: A Plan for the Future 95 Chapter Eleven Disruption and Evolution: The Development of Check 21 105 Chapter Twelve Banks vs. Merchants: The Durbin Amendment 113 Afterword The Path Ahead 125 Endnotes 128 Sources and Selected Bibliography 146 Photo Credits 154 Index 160 Contents • V ForewordAs Congress undertook the task of designing a central bank for the United States in 1913, it was clear that lawmakers intended for the new institution to play a key role in improving the performance of the nation’s payments system.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Paradigm for Financial Regulation: Getting from Here to There Stephen J
    Maryland Law Review Volume 43 | Issue 3 Article 2 A New Paradigm for Financial Regulation: Getting from Here to There Stephen J. Friedman Connie M. Friesen Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mlr Part of the Commercial Law Commons Recommended Citation Stephen J. Friedman, & Connie M. Friesen, A New Paradigm for Financial Regulation: Getting from Here to There, 43 Md. L. Rev. 413 (1984) Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mlr/vol43/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Academic Journals at DigitalCommons@UM Carey Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maryland Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UM Carey Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Maryland Law Review VOLUME 43 1984 NUMBER 3 © Copyright Maryland Law Review, Inc. 1984 A NEW PARADIGM FOR FINANCIAL REGULATION: GETTING FROM HERE TO THERE* STEPHEN J. FRIEDMAN** CONNIE M. FRIESEN*** "We decide what business we want to be in, and then we get aroundthe laws." - Words of a Senior ice Presidentfor Strategic Planning at a major money-center bank.' I. INTRODUCTION This Article provides a framework for developing a new regulatory paradigm for the financial services industry. After introductory com- ments about the obsolescence of the current regulatory system, it briefly explores the historical development of such significant regulatory themes as the dual banking system, multiple federal regulators, the sepa- ration of commercial and investment banking, restrictions on interstate banking, and the special character of banks. Next, following a review of previous attempts to restructure financial regulation, it concludes that the creation of a new regulatory paradigm has become necessary, and * The precursor to this Article was delivered by Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Banking Problems in the Northeast
    Chapter 10 BankingBanking ProblemsProblems inin thethe NortheastNortheast Introduction The banking problems in the Northeast were indissoluble from the regions real estate problems.1 Fueled by a strong regional economy, both residential and commercial real es- tate markets in the region boomed during the 1980s, but the boom eventually led to over- building and rampant real estate speculation. Late in the decade, when the regional economy weakened and a high volume of new construction projects coincided with dimin- ished demand, the real estate market boom turned into a bust. During the early 1990s, an oversupply of completed projects came on the market and real estate prices went into a sharp decline. In an environment of increased real estate loan defaults, a significant number of northeastern banks failed: 16 in 1990, 52 in 1991, and 43 in 1992.2 These failures ac- counted for substantial portions of the nations total volume of failed-bank assets and of the FDICs bank-failure resolution costs for those years. Losses from northeastern bank failures totaled $1.3 billion in 1990, $5.5 billion in 1991, and $2.8 billion in 1992and constituted 45 percent, 91 percent, and 77 percent, respectively, of total FDIC failure-resolution costs for those years. Failures were particularly prominent in 1991, when assets of failed banks represented 25.4 percent of prior year-end banking assets in New Hampshire, 18.3 percent in Connecticut, 15.2 percent in Maine, and 12.0 percent in Massachusetts.3 The 1991 failure of three subsidiaries of the Bank of New England Corporation (the Bank of New England, Connecticut Bank and Trust Co., and the Maine National Bank), a failure which many would identify as the last major failure of the banking crises of the 1980s and early 1990s, was especially significant.
    [Show full text]
  • Bail-In As an Alternative Failure Resolution Mechanism in Nigeria
    22 BAIL-IN AS AN ALTERNATIVE FAILURE RESOLUTION MECHANISM IN NIGERIA Kabir S. Katata Kingsley O. Nwaigwe Research, Policy & International Relations Department Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation Abstract The 2007-2009 global financial crisis resulted in public sector capital injections used to directly bail-out major global banks in excess of US$1 trillion. When the guarantees and insurance provided by major governments were added, the cost of the bail-out was estimated to be more than US$8.5 trillion. The 2009 Nigerian banking crisis led to the capital injection of N879 billion (more than 10% of GDP) into the Nigerian banks in the form of subordinated loan as well as through the purchase of bad loans. To prevent re- occurrence of bail-outs using taxpayers fund and in order to reduce the risks posed by systemically important banks, various reform initiatives were undertaken at both national and international levels, especially in the area of resolution planning. Consequently, a new tool, known as bail-in, was developed. Bail-in allows the authorities to make sure that shareholders and creditors of a bank bear the costs of failure, first before recourse to public funds. This paper describes the bail-in resolution tool available to regulators to resolve failing banks. The paper presents the bail-in creditor-funded resolution regime, its structure, merits and demerits. The paper also applies the bail-in regime to three Nigerian banks that were resolved using the bridge-bank mechanism. It was found that the bail-in resolution could have also achieved the successful recapitalisation of those banks within a much shorter time and at a fraction of the injected funds (only the liquidity support feature of the ‘lender-of-last-resort’ was required).
    [Show full text]
  • AVS Financial Institutions
    Early Warning Network – These Financial Institutions are searched automatically for each request 1. Ally Bank 2. Bank of America 3. Bank of Texas, Nat Assn 4. BBVA Compass 5. Branch Banking and Trust 6. Capitol One 7. Discover Bank 8. JP Morgan Chase 9. SunTrust Bank 10. TD Bank 11. The Huntington National Bank 12. Wells Fargo Bank Other Financial Institutions – These Financial Institutions may be searched through the Geo- Search or Added to the request using the Directed Account Search option 13. 1199 SEIU FCU 14. 121 Financial CU 15. 167th TFR FCU 16. 1880 Bank 17. 1st Advantage Bank 18. 1st Advantage FCU 19. 1st Bank 20. 1st Bank & Trust 21. 1st Bank in Hominy 22. 1st Bank of Sea Isle City 23. 1st Bank Yuma 24. 1st Cameron State Bank 25. 1st Capital Bank 26. 1st Choice CU 27. 1st Class Express CU 28. 1st Colonial Community Bank 29. 1st Community Bank 30. 1st Community CU 31. 1st Community FCU 32. 1st Constitution Bank 33. 1st Cooperative FCU 34. 1st Ed CU 35. 1st Equity Bank 36. 1st Equity Bank Northwest 37. 1st Federal Savings Bank of SC, Inc. 38. 1st Financial Bank USA 39. 1st Financial FCU 40. 1st Gateway CU 41. 1st Kansas CU 42. 1st Liberty FCU 43. 1st MidAmerica CU 44. 1st Mississippi FCU 45. 1st National Bank 46. 1st Northern California CU 47. 1st Resource CU 48. 1st Source Bank 49. 1st State Bank 50. 1st State Bank of Mason City 51. 1st Street CU 52. 1st Summit Bank 53. 1st Trust Bank, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • English Speaking West African Countries, Bank of Ghana, Banking Commission for Central Africa (COBAC), China Banking and Regulatory Commission, Bank of Uganda, U.K
    This volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The material in this publication is copyrighted. Public Disclosure Authorized FINANCIAL SECTOR ASSESSMENT PROGRAM NIGERIA Public Disclosure Authorized CRISIS MANAGEMENT AND CRISIS PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORKS TECHNICAL NOTE Public Disclosure Authorized MAY 20131 INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND THE WORLD BANK MONETARY AND CAPITAL MARKETS DEPARTMENT FINANCIAL SECTOR VICE PRESIDENCY AFRICA REGION VICE PRESIDENCY Public Disclosure Authorized 1 This note is prepared on the basis of information received as of September 2012 2 Contents Page Glossary .................................................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 4 I. The Nigerian Banking Crisis of 2008–2009 and the Policy Response .................................. 7 II. Institutional Framework ..................................................................................................... 10 A. Institutional Framework and Coordination Arrangements for Systemic Risk Monitoring and Crisis Management...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bank Insolvency Law Now That It Matters Again
    Duke Law Journal VOLUME 42 DECEMBER 1992 NUMBER 3 BANK INSOLVENCY LAW NOW THAT IT MATTPERS AGAIN PETER P. SWIREt TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................... 471 I. THE HISTORY AND CURRENT NATURE OF SPECIAL BANK INSOLVENCY LAW ................... 477 A. The History of the Special Bank Insolvency Regime ............................. 478 B. The Current Superpowers of the Banking Agencies ............................ 481 1. Cross-Guarantees..................... 482 2. D'Oench Powers ..................... 483 3. Other Special Insolvency Rules ........... 484 C. Summary ........................... 490 II. SYSTEMIC EFFECTS OF BANK FAILURE AND SPECIAL BANK INSOLVENCY RULES ............... 490 A. Special Bank Insolvency Rules Before Deposit Insurance ........................... 490 B. Assessing Immediacy and Bank Runs as the Bases for a Special Insovency Regime .............. 494 C. Implications of Deposit Insurance for Bank t Associate Professor, University of Virginia School of Law. I would like to thank Akhil Amar, Lynn Baker, Lawrence Baxter, Rick Carnell, Michael Dooley, Howell Jack- son, Ed Kitch, Paul Mahoney, Dayna Matthew, John McCoid, Glen Robinson, Bob Scott, and participants in a workshop at the University of Virginia for comments on previous drafts. Excellent research assistance was provided by Corby Anderson, Patrick Crawford, Jill DeGraff, and Jeanne Hovenden. I am also grateful to the University of Virginia Law School Foundation and the Bankard Fund for Political Economy for generous research support. DUKE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 42:469 Insolvency Rules . ...................... 497 1. "Saving the Fund" as a Source of Special Rules ............................. 497 a. Reasons supporting the "save the fund" argument .................. 498 b. Reasons for rejecting the "save the fund" argument ................. 501 c. Assessing the "save the fund" argument . ..................... 503 2. FDIC Expertise as a Source of Special Rules ............................
    [Show full text]
  • An Effective Regime for Non-Viable Banks: US Experience and Considerations for EU Reform
    STUDY Requested by the ECON committee An Effective Regime for Non-viable Banks: US Experience and Considerations for EU Reform Banking Union Scrutiny External authors: Anna GELPERN Nicolas VERON Economic Governance Support Unit (EGOV) Directorate-General for Internal Policies of the Union PE 624.432 - July 2019 EN IPOL | Economic Governance Support Unit 2 An Effective Regime for Non- viable Banks: US Experience and Considerations for EU Reform Banking Union Scrutiny Abstract For 85 years, the US regime for non-viable banks has maintained a high degree of stability and public confidence by protecting deposits, while working to minimise the public cost of that protection. With awareness of the difference in context, EU reformers can draw valuable insights from the US experience. On balance, a ` review of the US regime supports arguments in favour of harmonisation and centralisation of bank insolvency proceedings and deposit insurance in Europe’s banking union. A unitary regime would improve on the current EU status quo along multiple dimensions: deposit protection, creditor rights, controlling moral hazard, predictability and operational effectiveness, transparency and accountability, and financial stability. It would help break the bank-sovereign vicious circle in the euro area. The US experience suggests that substantial improvements are achievable in a well-designed system of institutional checks and balances that learns and adapts over time. PE 624.432 This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. AUTHORS Anna GELPERN Nicolas VERON RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR Jérôme DESLANDES Cristina DIAS Marcel MAGNUS LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE EDITOR The Economic Governance Support Unit provides in-house and external expertise to support EP committees and other parliamentary bodies in shaping legislation and exercising democratic scrutiny over EU internal policies.
    [Show full text]