Because many banks continue to take a bruising from banking examiners, it should come as no surprise that some have considered a change of charter in hopes of finding a less overbearing overseer.
In particular, recent headlines have shown that a significant number of national banks have left a national charter for a state charter. Since 2000, almost 300 national banks have made the switch.
Provisions from a spate of recent Office of the Comptroller of the Currency consent orders may illustrate why, with some provisions requiring significantly higher capital ratios than other regulators have demanded from similarly situated state-chartered institutions as well as other provisions essentially forcing national banks to either sell to new owners or face receivership.
If you are contemplating a charter conversion for your bank, there are a number of key issues to consider before you make the change. These include:
Access to Government Officials: Because state regulators are geographically closer and more familiar with the situation on the ground, channels of communication may be more open and less adversarial. Likewise, small financial institutions may exert greater political influence either directly or through their state bankers’ association.
However, in practice, most state regulators exercise great deference to the FDIC or Federal Reserve in both examinations and regulatory approvals, and for institutions seeking growth, dual application processes required by the state and federal regulator may raise more issues in connection with required regulatory approvals.
Reliance on Federal Preemption: Many multi-state institutions rely on the federal preemption of state laws afforded national banks. Although the Dodd-Frank Act has rolled back federal preemption in some respects, preemption remains effective in many areas crucial to national bank operations. Consequently, conversion to a state charter could raise supervisory issues for certain product lines.
While a 1997 Cooperative Agreement brokered by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors is intended to coordinate regulation and supervision among the states, certain state laws in jurisdictions outside of the bank’s home state continue to apply and may necessitate changes to various products to comply with consumer protection statutes and fair lending laws. However, this concern is mitigated by parity or “wildcard” statutes enacted in many states, which allow state-chartered banks to engage in activities that would be permissible for a nationally chartered institution.
The upshot, however, is that converting institutions in some cases may need to undertake burdensome surveys of state laws to ensure compliance with disparate local requirements.
Additional Powers and Restrictions: State bank charters frequently feature notable differences in terms of the powers granted and restrictions imposed on bank activities. These often include different legal lending limits, restrictions on sales of insurance, and ownership of banking premises. For states that permit LLC banks, even the legal structure of an institution can be different. A thorough understanding of these differences is important to ensure that the bank’s business plan following conversion will not be impeded.
New Requirements under Dodd-Frank: To eliminate perceived problems related to regulatory arbitrage, the Dodd-Frank Act generally precludes charter conversion whenever the converting institution is subject to a consent order or memorandum of understanding issued by its current regulator. Although there is an exception to this rule if the converting bank seeks prior approval from its regulator and submits a written corrective-action plan, relief under this exception is rare and unlikely to be granted in most circumstances.
Conversion Expenses and Licenses: State examination fees are generally less than those charged by the OCC, in part because state regulators share examination responsibility with either the FDIC or Federal Reserve, neither of which charge fees for their exams. However, state regulators typically charge an application fee for a conversion plus additional fees based on things like the number of branches and the bank’s authorized capital stock. In some states, bank directors and officers also may be required to obtain licenses, and in any jurisdiction, the bank likely will incur legal fees to prepare compliant board and shareholder resolutions, articles of incorporation, bylaws, publication notices, and other legal documents related to the conversion process. As such, while banks should enjoy long-term savings, bankers should be cognizant of the up-front cost of conversion.
Charter choice remains a key consideration for bank operations. Although historical benefits of the national bank charter continue, it appears that many are finding in the current regulatory environment that those benefits do not outweigh other considerations affecting bank performance.