Credit union trade groups weighed in on a series of hotly-contested proposals passed by the NCUA Thursday during a contentious board meeting.

The meeting’s agenda included proposed changes to field of membership reform, which NAFCU President/CEO Dan Berger applauded in a post-meeting press release.

“As commerce and consumer behavior continue to rapidly evolve with innovative technologies, we are pleased to see that the agency listened to our member credit unions’ suggestions on how to keep pace with today’s marketplace,” he said of the comprehensive changes. “NAFCU is carefully reviewing the proposal and we look forward to working with [the] NCUA to ensure that this rule provides requisite regulatory relief for federal credit unions.”

Similarly, CUNA President/CEO Jim Nussle called the proposed changes “sensible” in a press release. He said the rule “stays within the confines of the Federal Credit Union Act all while ensuring American consumers are allowed more options when choosing their financial service provider.”

However, the American Bankers Association stepped into the fray with a letter to the NCUA board and others on Wednesday. Incoming ABA President Rob Nichols said the changes are outside the scope of what Congress intended, and allow credit unions to move even further away from the narrow common bonds that define their mission.

Former NCUA Chairman Dennis Dollar told CU Times that some credit unions will be disappointed by some of the items left in place.

“…[T]hey left in place the arbitrary population caps for MSA communities and, even though they increased them, for rural districts,” Dollar said. “They could have gone further under the statute in these areas and several others such as allowing reasonable proximity for physical presence in an underserved area.”

Dollar, principal partner for Dollar Associates, added the NCUA could have been more aggressive and still stayed well within the law’s provision.

While a 73.1% overhead transfer rate increase was approved, the transfer of authority to set the rate drew criticism from NASCUS CEO Lucy Ito. In a press release, she said the NCUA is “foregoing responsibility for safety and soundness as the charterer of federal credit unions” by shifting “virtually all” safety and soundness-related expenses to the share insurance fund overhead rate.”

She added that once the issue is published to the Federal Register in January, public comments may provide a clear picture as to “how and why the agency assigns all safety and soundness expenses to the OTR.”

The board voted two-to-one on a two-year budget, which will move the 2016 budget to just under $300 million and increase the 2017 budget to $319 million.

Berger also called for additional transparency on the budget process.

“The agency has not held a public hearing on its budget in six years, and credit unions deserve the chance to be a part of the process that they ultimately fund,” Berger said.

CUNA also expressed concern that the NCUA has increased its budget for the ninth straight year.

“We believe the agency needs to monitor and modernize resources to maximize funds and contain costs,” Nussle said.

Both Nussle and Berger urged the agency to move back to an 18-month examination cycle for low-risk credit unions. NCUA Chairman Debbie Matz said in the meeting that she would consider looking at the issue after the risk-based capital standards are implemented in 2019. NCUA Board Member Mark McWatters questioned why the agency must wait several years to offer additional regulatory relief instead of looking at the issue now.

Instant Insights /

Trades Praise FOM Proposal, Seek Budget Transparency

Related Stories

Recommended For You