30-Day Federal Register Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices
OMB approved it. Accordingly, the
Agencies stated in the Policy Statement
that they would announce the effective
date of the information collection
following OMB’s approval. The
Agencies are pleased to announce that
on February 18, 2016, OMB approved
the collection of information for OCC,
the Board, FDIC, CFPB, and SEC and
approved NCUA’s on March 11, 2016;
thereby making these collections
effective the date of OMB approval. The
OMB-assigned control numbers for the
collection of information are as follows:
OCC—1557–0334; Board—7100–0368;
FDIC—3064–0200; CFPB—3170–0060;
SEC—3235–0740; and NCUA—3133–
0193.
Dated: June 28, 2016.
Karen Solomon,
Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency.
By order of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, June 28, 2016.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Secretary of the Board.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Dated at Washington, DC, this 17th day of
June, 2016.
Valerie J. Best,
Assistant Executive Secretary.
Dated: July 6, 2016.
Richard Cordray,
Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial
Protection.
Dated: June 21, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission.
By the National Credit Union
Administration Board on June 22, 2016.
Gerard Poliquin,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2016–16459 Filed 7–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–33–6210–01–6741–01–4810–AM–
8010–01–7535–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Joint Comment Request
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC), Treasury; Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve

AGENCY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

System (Board); and Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
ACTION: Notice of information
collections to be submitted to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA).
In accordance with the
requirements of the PRA (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35), the OCC, the Board, and the
FDIC (the ‘‘agencies’’) may not conduct
or sponsor, and the respondent is not
required to respond to, an information
collection unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. On
September 18, 2015, the agencies, under
the auspices of the Federal Financial
Institutions Examination Council
(FFIEC), requested public comment for
60 days on a proposal for the revision
and extension of the Consolidated
Reports of Condition and Income (Call
Report), which are currently approved
collections of information. The proposal
included deletions of certain existing
data items, revisions of certain reporting
thresholds and certain existing data
items, the addition of certain new data
items, and certain instructional
revisions. As described in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below, after considering the comments
received on the proposal, the FFIEC and
the agencies will proceed with most of
the reporting revisions proposed in
September 2015, with some
modifications, and the FFIEC and the
agencies are not proceeding with certain
elements of the proposal. An additional
revision to the instructions proposed by
a commenter also would be
implemented. These proposed reporting
changes would take effect as of the
September 30, 2016, or the March 31,
2017, report date, depending on the
nature of the proposed reporting change.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before August 12, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments to
any or all of the agencies. All comments,
which should refer to the OMB control
number(s), will be shared among the
agencies.
OCC: Because paper mail in the
Washington, DC area and at the OCC is
subject to delay, commenters are
encouraged to submit comments by
email, if possible, to prainfo@
occ.treas.gov. Alternatively, comments
may be sent to: Legislative and
Regulatory Activities Division, Office of
the Comptroller of the Currency,
Attention ‘‘1557–0081, FFIEC 031 and
041,’’ 400 7th Street SW., Suite 3E–218,
Mail Stop 9W–11, Washington, DC
SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00084

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

45357

20219. In addition, comments may be
sent by fax to (571) 465–4326.
You may personally inspect and
photocopy comments at the OCC, 400
7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20219.
For security reasons, the OCC requires
that visitors make an appointment to
inspect comments. You may do so by
calling (202) 649–6700 or, for persons
who are deaf or hard of hearing, TTY,
(202) 649–5597. Upon arrival, visitors
will be required to present valid
government-issued photo identification
and submit to security screening in
order to inspect and photocopy
comments.
All comments received, including
attachments and other supporting
materials, are part of the public record
and subject to public disclosure. Do not
include any information in your
comment or supporting materials that
you consider confidential or
inappropriate for public disclosure.
Board: You may submit comments,
which should refer to ‘‘FFIEC 031 and
FFIEC 041,’’ by any of the following
methods:
• Agency Web site: http://
www.federalreserve.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments at:
http://www.federalreserve.gov/
generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: regs.comments@
federalreserve.gov. Include the reporting
form numbers in the subject line of the
message.
• Fax: (202) 452–3819 or (202) 452–
3102.
• Mail: Robert DeV. Frierson,
Secretary, Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20551.
All public comments are available
from the Board’s Web site at
www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/
foia/ProposedRegs.cfm as submitted,
unless modified for technical reasons.
Accordingly, your comments will not be
edited to remove any identifying or
contact information. Public comments
may also be viewed electronically or in
paper in Room MP–500 of the Board’s
Martin Building (20th and C Streets
NW.) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
on weekdays.
FDIC: You may submit comments,
which should refer to ‘‘FFIEC 031 and
FFIEC 041,’’ by any of the following
methods:
• Agency Web site: http://
www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/federal/.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments on the FDIC’s Web site.

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

45358

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: [email protected].
Include ‘‘FFIEC 031 and FFIEC 041’’ in
the subject line of the message.
• Mail: Manuel E. Cabeza, Counsel,
Attn: Comments, Room MB–3105,
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
550 17th Street NW., Washington, DC
20429.
• Hand Delivery: Comments may be
hand delivered to the guard station at
the rear of the 550 17th Street Building
(located on F Street) on business days
between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Public Inspection: All comments
received will be posted without change
to http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/
federal/ including any personal
information provided. Paper copies of
public comments may be requested from
the FDIC Public Information Center by
telephone at (877) 275–3342 or (703)
562–2200.
Additionally, commenters may send a
copy of their comments to the OMB
desk officer for the agencies by mail to
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, U.S. Office of Management and
Budget, New Executive Office Building,
Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503; by fax to (202)
395–6974; or by email to oira_
[email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information about the proposed
revisions to the Call Report discussed in
this notice, please contact any of the
agency staff whose names appear below.
In addition, copies of the Call Report
forms can be obtained at the FFIEC’s
Web site (http://www.ffiec.gov/ffiec_
report_forms.htm).
OCC: Kevin Korzeniewski, Senior
Attorney, (202) 649–5490, or for persons
who are deaf or hard of hearing, TTY,
(202) 649–5597, Legislative and
Regulatory Activities Division, Office of
the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th
Street SW., Washington, DC 20219.
Board: Nuha Elmaghrabi, Federal
Reserve Board Clearance Officer, (202)
452–3829, Office of the Chief Data
Officer, Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, 20th and C
Streets NW., Washington, DC 20551.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf
(TDD) users may call (202) 263–4869.
FDIC: Manuel E. Cabeza, Counsel,
(202) 898–3767, Legal Division, Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
agencies are proposing to revise and
extend for three years the Call Report,
which is currently an approved
collection of information for each
agency.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

Report Title: Consolidated Reports of
Condition and Income (Call Report).
Form Number: FFIEC 031 (for banks
and savings associations with domestic
and foreign offices) and FFIEC 041 (for
banks and savings associations with
domestic offices only).
Frequency of Response: Quarterly.
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit.
OCC
OMB Control No.: 1557–0081.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
1,412 national banks and federal savings
associations.
Estimated Average Burden per
Response: 59.36 burden hours per
quarter to file.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
335,265 burden hours to file.
Board
OMB Control No.: 7100–0036.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
839 state member banks.
Estimated Average Burden per
Response: 59.89 burden hours per
quarter to file.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
200,991 burden hours to file.
FDIC
OMB Control No.: 3064–0052.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
3,891 insured state nonmember banks
and state savings associations.
Estimated Average Burden per
Response: 44.55 burden hours per
quarter to file.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
693,376 burden hours to file.
The estimated burden per response
for the quarterly filings of the Call
Report is an average that varies by
agency because of differences in the
composition of the institutions under
each agency’s supervision (e.g., size
distribution of institutions, types of
activities in which they are engaged,
and existence of foreign offices). The
average reporting burden for the filing of
the Call Report as it is proposed to be
revised is estimated to range from 20 to
775 hours per quarter, depending on an
individual institution’s circumstances.
Type of Review: Revision and
extension of currently approved
collections.
General Description of Reports
These information collections are
mandatory: 12 U.S.C. 161 (for national
banks), 12 U.S.C. 324 (for state member
banks), 12 U.S.C. 1817 (for insured state
nonmember commercial and savings
banks), and 12 U.S.C. 1464 (for federal
and state savings associations). At
present, except for selected data items,

PO 00000

Frm 00085

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

these information collections are not
given confidential treatment.
Abstract
Institutions submit Call Report data to
the agencies each quarter for the
agencies’ use in monitoring the
condition, performance, and risk profile
of individual institutions and the
industry as a whole. Call Report data
serve a regulatory or public policy
purpose by assisting the agencies in
fulfilling their missions of ensuring the
safety and soundness of financial
institutions and the financial system
and the protection of consumer
financial rights, as well as agencyspecific missions affecting national and
state-chartered institutions, e.g.,
monetary policy, financial stability, and
deposit insurance. Call Reports are the
source of the most current statistical
data available for identifying areas of
focus for on-site and off-site
examinations. The agencies use Call
Report data in evaluating institutions’
corporate applications, including, in
particular, interstate merger and
acquisition applications for which, as
required by law, the agencies must
determine whether the resulting
institution would control more than ten
percent of the total amount of deposits
of insured depository institutions in the
United States. Call Report data also are
used to calculate institutions’ deposit
insurance and Financing Corporation
assessments and national banks’ and
federal savings associations’ semiannual
assessment fees.
Current Actions
I. Introduction
On September 18, 2015, the agencies
requested comment on various proposed
revisions to the Call Report
requirements (September 2015
proposal).1 These proposed revisions
included a number of burden-reducing
changes and certain other Call Report
revisions identified during the agencies’
most recently completed statutorily
mandated review of the information
collected in the Call Report.2 The
agencies’ proposal also incorporated
certain additional burden-reducing Call
Report changes identified after the
completion of the statutory review.
Furthermore, the proposal included
several new and revised Call Report
data items, some of which would have
a limited impact on community
institutions. Certain instructional
clarifications also were contained in the
1 See

80 FR 56539 (September 18, 2015).
review is mandated by section 604 of the
Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006
(12 U.S.C. 1817(a)(11)).
2 This

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

proposal. The comment period for the
proposal ended on November 17, 2015.
As originally proposed in September
2015, the Call Report revisions were
targeted for implementation in
December 2015 or March 2016,
depending on the nature of the
proposed revision. Based on comments
received on the proposal and other
factors, the FFIEC announced on
December 3, 2015, that the effective date
of those Call Report revisions with a
proposed effective date of December 31,
2015, had been deferred until no earlier
than March 31, 2016.3 On January 8,
2016, the agencies notified reporting
institutions that the effective date for all
of the proposed Call Report changes had
been deferred until no earlier than
September 30, 2016.4
General comments on the September
2015 notice are summarized in Section
II below. Section III of this notice
discusses each proposed revision, the
related comments received (if any), the
disposition of these comments, and the
agencies’ decision on each proposed
revision.5 The effective dates for the
Call Report revisions the agencies are
proposing to implement are summarized
in Section IV.
The agencies’ September 2015
proposal also described the formal
initiative the FFIEC launched in
December 2014 to identify potential
opportunities to reduce burden
associated with Call Report
requirements for community banks. The
FFIEC’s initiative, which responds to
industry concerns about the cost and
burden arising from the Call Report,
comprises actions by the FFIEC and the
agencies in the following five areas:
• The publication of the September
2015 Call Report proposal, which
requested comment on a number of
proposed burden-reducing changes and
certain other proposed Call Report
revisions.
• The acceleration of the start of the
agencies’ next statutorily mandated
review of the existing Call Report data
items, which otherwise would have
commenced in 2017.
• Consideration of the feasibility and
merits of creating a less burdensome
version of the quarterly Call Report for
institutions that meet certain criteria.
• Obtaining, through industry
dialogue, a better understanding of the
3 See Financial Institution Letter (FIL) 57–2015,
December 3, 2015, at https://www.fdic.gov/news/
news/financial/2015/fil15057.html.
4 See FIL–2–2016, January 8, 2016, at https://
www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2016/
fil16002.html.
5 Section III.C.4 addresses an instructional
revision proposed by a banking organization that
was not included in the September 2015 proposal.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

aspects of institutions’ Call Report
preparation process that are significant
sources of reporting burden, including
where manual intervention by an
institution’s staff is necessary to report
particular information.
• Offering periodic training to
bankers via teleconferences and
webinars that would explain upcoming
reporting changes and could also
provide guidance on areas of the Call
Report bankers find challenging to
complete.
II. Comments Received on the
September 2015 Proposal
The agencies collectively received
comments on the September 2015
proposal from 13 entities: Seven
banking organizations, four bankers’
associations, and two consulting firms.
Comments on the specific Call Report
revisions in that proposal are discussed
in Section III below. In addition, two
banking organizations commented about
the burden imposed on them by the Call
Report. Furthermore, all four bankers’
associations and one consulting firm
specifically addressed the community
bank Call Report burden-reduction
initiative described in the September
2015 proposal, expressing support for
this initiative and encouraging the
FFIEC and the agencies to pursue the
development of a small bank Call
Report. One other banking organization
provided its recommendation for
reducing the information collected in
the Call Report, but did not refer to the
burden-reduction initiative.
For example, one bankers’ association
described the FFIEC’s formal initiative
as ‘‘the right answer’’ for addressing the
increased regulatory burden of the Call
Report and commended the FFIEC for
its consideration of a less burdensome
Call Report for community banks.
Another bankers’ association welcomed
the agencies’ Call Report streamlining
efforts and sought prompt
implementation of measures to reduce
regulatory burden. The two other
bankers’ associations commented
favorably on the FFIEC’s recognition of
the reporting burden imposed by the
Call Report and encouraged the FFIEC
to create a less burdensome Call Report
for smaller institutions. They also
recommended that the Call Report could
be streamlined for smaller institutions
because they typically do not engage in
many of the activities about which data
must be reported in the Call Report.
The FFIEC’s 2015 Annual Report
describes the status of the actions being
undertaken in the five areas within the
community bank Call Report burdenreduction initiative as of year-end

PO 00000

Frm 00086

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

45359

2015.6 In this regard, the annual report
notes that the FFIEC’s Task Force on
Reports (TFOR) ‘‘reported to the Council
in December 2015 on options for
proceeding with a less burdensome Call
Report for eligible institutions and other
Call Report streamlining methods. The
additional feedback about sources of
Call Report burden and these options
from the TFOR’s community banker
outreach activities in February 2016 will
help inform a subsequent TFOR
recommendation to the Council
regarding a streamlining proposal for
eligible small institutions that can be
issued for industry comment in 2016.’’
Thus, the agencies anticipate that they
will publish a proposal later this year
that will extend the burden-reducing
changes to the Call Report beyond those
included in the September 2015
proposal and discussed in this notice.
Two bankers’ associations presented
some additional recommendations to
the FFIEC and the agencies in their
comments on the September 2015
proposal. These recommendations
included establishing ‘‘an industry
advisory committee to provide the
FFIEC with advice and guidance on
issues related to FFIEC reports.’’ As one
of the actions under the burdenreduction initiative, the FFIEC and the
agencies have committed to pursue
industry dialogue regarding Call Report
matters such as activities enabling the
agencies to better understand the
burdensome aspects of the Call Report.
This is evidenced by community banker
outreach activities with small groups of
community bankers that were organized
by two bankers’ associations and
conducted via conference call meetings
in February 2016. The FFIEC and the
agencies believe their existing dialogue
with the industry, in addition to the
opportunity for public participation in
the Call Report revision process, allows
ample avenues to provide input
concerning revisions to FFIEC reports.
The two associations also
recommended that the FFIEC ‘‘work to
ensure other required regulatory
reporting forms are updated
simultaneously,’’ which they further
described as ensuring consistency
between definitions and reporting
treatments used in the Call Report and
in other regulatory reports that
institutions file.7 The agencies will seek
to be more conscious of relationships
between the Call Report requirements
and other FFIEC regulatory reports,
6 FFIEC 2015 Annual Report, pages 16–18 (http://
www.ffiec.gov/PDF/annrpt15.pdf).
7 As an example, the associations cited an
apparent inconsistency between the definition of
‘‘domicile’’ in the Call Report and certain other
regulatory reports.

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

45360

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

particularly when considering revisions
to the data collected in the Call Report.
Another recommendation from the
two bankers’ associations was for the
FFIEC and the agencies to allow
sufficient time for institutions to
implement any reporting changes. They
stated that the proposed effective dates
in the September 2015 proposal would
not provide sufficient time for
implementing the reporting changes.
One of the banking organizations
expressed a similar concern. The two
associations urged the FFIEC and the
agencies to implement changes to nonincome line items no earlier than a full
quarter after the quarter in which the
notice requesting OMB approval is
published in the Federal Register. For
data on income and quarterly averages,
they suggested that such changes take
effect at the beginning of a reporting
year.
In recognition of the impact of the
September 2015 proposal on institutions
from a systems standpoint, the agencies
deferred the effective dates for the
reporting changes in that proposal to no
earlier than September 30, 2016, as
mentioned above in Section I. As will be
discussed below with respect to the
implementation of the specific proposed
Call Report changes that are the subject
of this notice, the agencies have sought
to set the effective dates for these
changes in a manner consistent with the
timing suggested by the two bankers’
associations. To assist institutions in
preparing for the reporting changes in
this proposal, drafts of the reporting
instructions for the new and revised
Call Report items will be made available
to institutions on the FFIEC’s Web site
when this Federal Register notice
requesting OMB approval is published.

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

III. Discussion of Proposed Call Report
Revisions
A. Deletions of Existing Data Items
Based on the agencies’ review of the
information that institutions are
required to report in the Call Report, the
agencies determined that the continued
collection of the following items is no
longer necessary and proposed to
eliminate them:
(1) Schedule RI, Income Statement:
Memorandum items 14.a and 14.b, on
other-than-temporary impairments; 8
(2) Schedule RC–C, Part I, Loans and
Leases: Memorandum items 1.f.(2),
1.f.(5), and 1.f.(6) (and 1.f.(7) on the
FFIEC 031), on troubled debt
8 Institutions would continue to complete
Schedule RI, Memorandum item 14.c, on net
impairment losses recognized in earnings.
Memorandum item 14.c would be renumbered
Memorandum item 14.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

restructurings in certain loan categories
that are in compliance with their
modified terms;
(3) Schedule RC–N, Past Due and
Nonaccrual Loans, Leases, and Other
Assets: Memorandum items 1.f.(2),
1.f.(5), and 1.f.(6) (and 1.f.(7) on the
FFIEC 031), on troubled debt
restructurings in certain loan categories
that are 30 days or more past due or on
nonaccrual;
(4) Schedule RC–M, Memoranda:
Items 13.a.(5)(a) through (d) (and (e) on
the FFIEC 031), on loans in certain loan
categories that are covered by FDIC losssharing agreements; and
(5) Schedule RC–N: Items 11.e.(1)
through (4) (and (5) on the FFIEC 031),
on loans in certain loan categories that
are covered by FDIC loss-sharing
agreements and are 30 days or more past
due or on nonaccrual.
In addition, the agencies proposed to
eliminate Schedule RC–R, Part II, RiskWeighted Assets, item 18.b, on unused
commitments to asset-backed
commercial paper conduits with an
original maturity of one year or less.
Because the Schedule RC–R instructions
state that such commitments should be
reported in item 10 as off-balance sheet
securitization exposures, item 18.b is
not needed. Upon the elimination of
item 18.b, existing item 18.c of Schedule
RC–R, Part II, for unused commitments
with an original maturity exceeding one
year would be renumbered as item 18.b.
The agencies received comments from
two consulting firms and one banking
organization regarding these proposed
deletions. The banking organization
stated that these revisions would have
no impact on its reporting. One
consulting firm agreed with all of the
proposed deletions except the one
involving information on other-thantemporary impairment (OTTI) losses in
Schedule RI, Memorandum items 14.a
and 14.b. The firm believes the deletion
of the two OTTI items will eliminate
important information about the
performance of institutions’ securities
portfolios and how they recognize OTTI.
While the agencies acknowledge that
this proposal would result in the loss of
information on the total year-to-date
amount of OTTI losses and the portion
of these losses recognized in other
comprehensive income, institutions
would continue to report the portion of
OTTI losses recognized in earnings. It is
this portion of OTTI losses that is of
greatest interest and concern to the
agencies. Because some or all of each
OTTI loss must be recognized in
earnings, when an institution reports a
substantial amount of OTTI losses in
earnings, it is this item that serves as a
red flag for further supervisory follow-

PO 00000

Frm 00087

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

up by an institution’s primary federal
regulator (or, if applicable, its state
supervisor). Additionally, the portion of
OTTI losses that passes through other
comprehensive income and accumulates
in other comprehensive income is
excluded from regulatory capital for the
vast majority of institutions.
One consulting firm expressed
concern about the proposed deletion of
Memorandum items on troubled debt
restructurings in certain loan categories
in Schedules RC–C, Part I, and RC–N.
This firm stated that this information is
important for understanding the specific
nature of troubled loans relative to
restructured loans and suggested that
the loan categories being deleted may
need to be added back to the Call Report
if there is a significant economic
downturn. The agencies note that each
of the loan categories proposed for
deletion is a subset of the larger loan
category ‘‘All other loans,’’ which
institutions would continue to report.
Furthermore, the amount of troubled
debt restructurings in each of these
subset categories is reported only when
it exceeds 10 percent of the total amount
of troubled debt restructurings in
compliance with their modified terms
(Schedule RC–C, Part I) or not in
compliance with their modified terms
(Schedule RC–N), as appropriate. Thus,
the total amount of an institution’s
troubled debt restructurings, both those
in compliance with their modified terms
and those that are not, would continue
to be reported.
After considering these comments, all
of the items proposed for deletion
would be removed from the Call Report
effective September 30, 2016, except for
the deletion relating to other-thantemporary impairments, which would
take effect March 31, 2017.
B. New Reporting Threshold and
Increases in Existing Reporting
Thresholds
In five Call Report schedules,
institutions are currently required to
itemize and describe each component of
an existing item when the component
exceeds both a specified percentage of
the item and a specified dollar amount.9
Based on a preliminary evaluation of the
existing reporting thresholds, the
agencies concluded that the dollar
portion of the thresholds that currently
apply to these items can be increased to
9 The data items for which components in excess
of specified reporting thresholds are required to be
itemized and described are included in Schedule
RI–E, Explanations; Schedule RC–D, Trading Assets
and Liabilities; Schedule RC–F, Other Assets;
Schedule RC–G, Other Liabilities; and Schedule
RC–Q, Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value
on a Recurring Basis.

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices
provide a reduction in reporting burden
without a loss of data that would be
necessary for supervisory or other
public policy purposes. The percentage
portion of the existing thresholds would
not be changed. Accordingly, the
agencies proposed to raise from $25,000
to $100,000 the dollar portion of the
threshold for itemizing and describing
components of:
(1) Schedule RI–E, item 1, ‘‘Other
noninterest income;’’
(2) Schedule RI–E, item 2, ‘‘Other
noninterest expense;’’
(3) Schedule RC–F, item 6, ‘‘All other
assets;’’
(4) Schedule RC–G, item 4, ‘‘All other
liabilities;’’
(5) Schedule RC–Q, Memorandum
item 1, ‘‘All other assets;’’ and
(6) Schedule RC–Q, Memorandum
item 2, ‘‘All other liabilities.’’
The agencies also proposed to raise
from $25,000 to $1,000,000 the dollar
portion of the threshold for itemizing
and describing components of ‘‘Other
trading assets’’ and ‘‘Other trading
liabilities’’ in Schedule RC–D,
Memorandum items 9 and 10.
In addition, because institutions with
less than $1 billion in total assets
typically do not provide support for
asset-backed commercial paper
conduits, the agencies proposed to
exempt such institutions from
completing Schedule RC–S, Servicing,
Securitization, and Asset Sale
Activities, Memorandum items 3.a.(1),
3.a.(2), 3.b.(1), and 3.b.(2), on credit
enhancements and unused liquidity
commitments provided to asset-backed
commercial paper conduits.
The agencies received comments from
two bankers’ associations, two
consulting firms, and two banking
organizations regarding the proposed
changes involving reporting thresholds.
One banking organization supported the
higher thresholds, stating that raising
the thresholds would reduce reporting
burden, but the other said that this
change would not have an impact on its
reporting. The two bankers’ associations
expressed support for the targeted
approach to increasing the reporting
thresholds, but observed that an
increase from $25,000 to $100,000 for
six items would do little to reduce
reporting burden for most institutions.
The associations recommended that the
FFIEC consider increasing the
percentage portion of the reporting
threshold from the present three percent
to five to seven percent of the total
amount of an income statement item for
which components must be itemized
and described. At present, the
percentage portion of the reporting
threshold applicable to reporting

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

components of ‘‘Other noninterest
income’’ and ‘‘Other noninterest
expense’’ in Schedule RI–E is three
percent.10
Because of the interaction between
the dollar and percentage portions of the
reporting thresholds on the total amount
of an item that is subject to component
itemization and description, the
agencies acknowledge that the proposed
increase in the dollar portion of the
reporting threshold from $25,000 to
$100,000 may not benefit all
institutions, particularly larger
institutions. While these threshold
changes may not reduce reporting
burden for all institutions, they will not
increase the amount of information to be
reported by any institution. In addition,
as stated in the September 2015
proposal, the agencies are conducting
the statutorily mandated review of the
existing Call Report data items, which
may result in additional new or
upwardly revised reporting thresholds.
One consulting firm supported the
increase in the dollar portion of the
reporting threshold for Schedules RC–F,
RC–G, and RC–Q, but recommended
retaining the $25,000 threshold for the
‘‘Other noninterest income’’ and ‘‘Other
noninterest expense’’ in Schedule RI–E.
The consulting firm commented that, for
smaller banks, information on the
components of these noninterest items
‘‘is an important indicator of the activity
of the bank, its style and management
ability’’ and ‘‘provide[s] regulators with
a clearer insight into the activities of a
bank.’’ This firm also observed that the
component information is or should be
captured in institutions’ internal
accounting systems. The agencies
recognize that the proposed increase in
the dollar portion of the threshold for
reporting components of other
noninterest income and expense will
result in a reduced number of their
components being itemized and
described in Call Report Schedule RI–E,
particularly by smaller institutions.
However, in carrying out their on- and
off-site supervision of individual
institutions, the agencies are able to
follow up directly with an individual
institution when the level and trend of
noninterest income and expense, and
other elements of net income (or loss),
that are reflected in its Call Reports raise
questions about the quality of, and the
factors affecting, the institution’s
reported earnings. The agencies do not
believe the proposed increase in the
dollar portion of the reporting
10 For the other items for which the agencies
proposed an increase in the dollar portion of the
existing reporting threshold, the percentage portion
of the threshold is 25 percent of the total amount
of the item.

PO 00000

Frm 00088

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

45361

thresholds in Schedule RI–E will
impede their ability to evaluate
institutions’ earnings.
Another consulting firm questioned
the proposed increase from $25,000 to
$1,000,000 in the dollar portion of the
threshold for itemizing and describing
components of ‘‘Other trading assets’’
and ‘‘Other trading liabilities’’ in
Schedule RC–D, Memorandum items 9
and 10. In addition to meeting the dollar
portion of the threshold, a component
must exceed 25 percent of the total
amount of ‘‘Other trading assets’’ or
‘‘Other trading liabilities’’ in order to be
itemized and described in
Memorandum item 9 or 10, respectively.
The agencies further note that these two
memorandum items are to be completed
only by institutions that reported
average trading assets of $1 billion or
more in any of the four preceding
calendar quarters. Thus, at $1,000,000,
the proposed higher dollar threshold for
component itemization and description
in Memorandum items 9 and 10 of
Schedule RC–D would represent one
tenth of one percent of the amount of
average trading assets that an institution
must have in order to be subject to the
requirement to report components of its
other trading assets and liabilities that
exceed the reporting threshold. As a
result, the agencies believe that raising
the dollar portion of the threshold for
reporting components of Memorandum
items 9 and 10 of Schedule RC–D to
$1,000,000 will continue to provide
meaningful data while reducing burden
for institutions that must complete these
items.
After considering the comments about
the proposed new and increased
reporting thresholds, the agencies
propose to implement these changes
effective September 30, 2016.11
C. Instructional Revisions
1. Reporting Home Equity Lines of
Credit That Convert From Revolving to
Non-Revolving Status
Institutions report the amount
outstanding under revolving, open-end
lines of credit secured by 1–4 family
residential properties (commonly
known as home equity lines of credit or
HELOCs) in item 1.c.(1) of Schedule
RC–C, Part I, Loans and Leases. Closedend loans secured by 1–4 family
residential properties are reported in
Schedule RC–C, Part I, item 1.c.(2)(a) or
11 Although the proposed reporting threshold
changes would take effect as of September 30, 2016,
institutions may choose, but are not required, to
continue using $25,000 as the dollar portion of the
threshold for reporting components of the specified
items in the five previously identified schedules
rather than the higher dollar thresholds.

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

45362

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

(b), depending on whether the loan is a
first or a junior lien.12
A HELOC is a line of credit secured
by a lien on a 1–4 family residential
property that generally provides a draw
period followed by a repayment period.
During the draw period, a borrower has
revolving access to unused amounts
under a specified line of credit. During
the repayment period, the borrower can
no longer draw on the line of credit, and
the outstanding principal is either due
immediately in a balloon payment or is
repaid over the remaining loan term
through monthly payments. Because the
Call Report instructions do not address
the reporting treatment for a home
equity line of credit when it reaches its
end-of-draw period and converts from
revolving to nonrevolving status, the
agencies noted in their September 2015
proposal that they have found diversity
in how these credits are reported in
Schedule RC–C, Part I.
To address this absence of
instructional guidance and promote
consistency in reporting, the agencies
proposed to clarify the instructions for
reporting loans secured by 1–4 family
residential properties by specifying that
after a revolving open-end line of credit
has converted to non-revolving closedend status, the loan should be reported
as closed-end in Schedule RC–C, Part I,
item 1.c.(2)(a) or (b), as appropriate. In
their September 2015 proposal, the
agencies also requested comment on
whether an instructional requirement to
recategorize HELOCs as closed-end
loans for Call Report purposes would
create difficulties for institutions’ loan
recordkeeping systems.
The agencies received comments from
two bankers’ associations, one
consulting firm, and one banking
organization regarding the proposed
instructional clarification for HELOCs.
The consulting firm agreed with this
clarification because of the consistency
in reporting that it would provide. The
two bankers’ associations stated that
they appreciated the proposed
clarification, but noted that ‘‘material
definitional changes would require a
whole recoding of these credits.’’ The
associations observed that the proposed
clarification would likely have
implications for other regulatory
requirements such as the
Comprehensive Capital Analysis and
Review, which evaluates the capital
planning processes and capital
12 Information also is separately reported for
open-end and closed-end loans secured by 1–4
family residential properties in Schedule RI–B, Part
I, Charge-offs and Recoveries on Loans and Leases;
Memorandum items in Schedule RC–C, Part I;
Schedule RC–D; Schedule RC–M; and Schedule
RC–N.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

adequacy of the largest U.S.-based bank
holding companies. They also described
two situations involving HELOCs for
which further guidance would be
needed if the proposed instructional
change were to be implemented and
encouraged the agencies to provide
examples with the instructions for
reporting HELOCs.
The banking organization opposed the
proposed instructional clarification for
HELOCs and requested that it be
withdrawn, citing several difficulties it
would encounter in preparing its Call
Report if the clarification were made.
These difficulties include identifying
when a HELOC has begun the
repayment period and the lien position
of a HELOC at that time because the
bank’s loan system for HELOCs has not
been set up to generate this information.
The banking organization requested that
the agencies provide time for systems
reprogramming if the proposed
instructional clarification were to be
adopted.
Based on the issues raised in the
comments received on the proposed
HELOC instructional clarification, the
agencies are giving further consideration
to this proposal, including its effect on
and relationship to other regulatory
reporting requirements. Accordingly,
the agencies are not proceeding with
this proposed instructional clarification
at this time and the existing instructions
for reporting HELOCs in item 1.c.(1) of
Schedule RC–C, Part I, will remain in
effect. Once the agencies complete their
consideration of this instructional
matter and determine whether and how
the Call Report instructions should be
clarified with respect to the reporting of
revolving open-end lines of credit that
have converted to non-revolving closedend status, any proposed instructional
clarification will be published in the
Federal Register for comment.
2. Reporting Treatment for Securities for
Which a Fair Value Option Is Elected
The Call Report Glossary entry for
‘‘Trading Account’’ currently states that
‘‘all securities within the scope of the
Financial Accounting Standards Board’s
(FASB) Accounting Standards
Codification (ASC) Topic 320,
Investments-Debt and Equity Securities
(formerly FASB Statement No. 115,
‘‘Accounting for Certain Investments in
Debt and Equity Securities’’), that a
bank has elected to report at fair value
under a fair value option with changes
in fair value reported in current
earnings should be classified as trading
securities.’’ This reporting treatment
was based on language contained in
former FASB Statement No. 159, ‘‘The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets

PO 00000

Frm 00089

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

and Financial Liabilities,’’ but that
language was not codified when
Statement No. 159 was superseded by
current ASC Topic 825, Financial
Instruments. Accordingly, the agencies
proposed to revise the Glossary entry
language quoted above by replacing
‘‘should be classified’’ with ‘‘may be
classified.’’ The agencies also proposed
to include comparable language in the
Glossary entry for ‘‘Securities
Activities.’’
The agencies received comments from
two bankers’ associations and one
consulting firm regarding the proposed
instructional revision for the
classification of securities for which the
fair value option is elected. The
consulting firm welcomed the proposal.
The two bankers’ associations stated
that they understood the purpose of the
proposed instructional revision, but
they requested further clarification of
the reporting treatment for ‘‘securities
for which an institution has elected to
use the trading measurement
classification,’’ i.e., fair value through
earnings.
The agencies have reconsidered this
proposed instructional revision in light
of the comments received, including the
requested further clarification. Based on
this reconsideration, the agencies have
decided not to implement the proposed
instructional revision and to retain the
existing Call Report instructions
directing institutions to classify
securities reported at fair value under a
fair value option as trading securities.
3. Net Gains (Losses) on Sales of, and
Other-Than-Temporary Impairments on,
Equity Securities That Do Not Have
Readily Determinable Fair Values
As noted in the September 2015
proposal,13 the Call Report instructions
for Schedule RI, Income Statement,
address the reporting of realized gains
(losses), including other-than-temporary
impairments, on held-to-maturity and
available-for-sale securities as well as
the reporting of realized and unrealized
gains (losses) on trading securities and
other assets held for trading. However,
the Schedule RI instructions do not
specifically explain where to report
realized gains (losses) on sales or other
disposals of, and other-than-temporary
impairments on, equity securities that
do not have readily determinable fair
values and are not held for trading (and
to which the equity method of
accounting does not apply).
The instructions for Schedule RI, item
5.k, ‘‘Net gains (losses) on sales of other
assets (excluding securities),’’ direct
institutions to ‘‘[r]eport the amount of
13 See

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

80 FR 56543–56544 (September 18, 2015).

13JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices
net gains (losses) on sales and other
disposals of assets not required to be
reported elsewhere in the income
statement (Schedule RI).’’ The
instructions for item 5.k further advise
institutions to exclude net gains (losses)
on sales and other disposals of
securities and trading assets. The intent
of this wording was to cover securities
designated as held-to-maturity,
available-for-sale, and trading securities
because there are separate specific items
elsewhere in Schedule RI for the
reporting of realized gains (losses) on
such securities (items 6.a, 6.b, and 5.c,
respectively). Thus, the agencies
proposed to revise the instructions for
Schedule RI, item 5.k, by clarifying that
the exclusions from this item of net
gains (losses) on securities and trading
assets apply to held-to-maturity,
available-for-sale, and trading securities
and other assets held for trading. The
agencies also proposed to add language
to the instructions for Schedule RI, item
5.k, that explains that net gains (losses)
on sales and other disposals of equity
securities that do not have readily
determinable fair values and are not
held for trading (and to which the
equity method of accounting does not
apply), as well as other-than-temporary
impairments on such securities, should
be reported in item 5.k. In addition, the
agencies proposed to remove the
parenthetic ‘‘(excluding securities)’’
from the caption for item 5.k on the Call
Report forms and to add in its place a
footnote to this item advising
institutions to exclude net gains (losses)
on sales of trading assets and held-tomaturity and available-for-sale
securities.
The agencies received no comments
on these proposed changes to the
instructions and report form caption for

4. Custodial Bank Deduction
One banking organization that meets
the definition of a custodial bank for
deposit insurance assessment
purposes 14 submitted a comment on the
September 2015 proposal in which it
proposed a revision to the reporting of
custodial bank data in Schedule RC–O
that had not been included in that
proposal. The banking organization
recommended that a custodial bank that
reports that its custodial bank deduction
limit is zero in Schedule RC–O, item
11.b, should not need to calculate and
report its custodial bank deduction in
Schedule RC–O, item 11.a, because no
amount can be deducted. The banking
organization stated that this proposed
revision ‘‘would eliminate unnecessary
time and effort.’’
The agencies agree with the banking
organization’s proposal. Accordingly,
the agencies will revise the instructions
for Schedule RC–O, item 11.a,
‘‘Custodial bank deduction,’’ to state
that if a custodial bank’s deduction limit
as reported in Schedule RC–O, item
11.b, is zero, the custodial bank may
leave item 11.a blank rather than
calculating and reporting the amount of
its deduction. This instructional
revision would take effect September
30, 2016.
D. New and Revised Data Items and
Information of General Applicability
1. Increase in the Time Deposit Size
Threshold
Section 335 of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection

Act (Pub. L. 111–203) permanently
increased the standard maximum
deposit insurance amount (SMDIA)
from $100,000 to $250,000 effective July
21, 2010. The SMDIA had been
increased temporarily from $100,000 to
$250,000 by Section 136 of the
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act
of 2008 (Pub. L. 110–343). In response
to the increase in the limit of deposit
insurance coverage, the reporting of the
amount of ‘‘Total time deposits of
$100,000 or more’’ in Memorandum
item 2.c of Schedule RC–E, Deposit
Liabilities, was revised as of the March
31, 2010, report date. As of that date,
institutions began to separately report
their ‘‘Total time deposits of $100,000
through $250,000’’ (Memorandum item
2.c) and their ‘‘Total time deposits of
more than $250,000’’ (Memorandum
item 2.d).
However, the reporting of the
quarterly averages, interest expense, and
maturity and repricing data for time
deposits of $100,000 or more in
Schedules RC–K, RI, and RC–E,
respectively, have not been updated to
reflect the permanent $250,000 deposit
insurance limit. In this regard, in its
comment letter to the agencies in
response to their first request for
comments under the Economic Growth
and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1996,15 the American Bankers
Association recommended revising the
Schedule RC–E deposit reporting items
to reflect the new FDIC insurance limit
of $250,000. Accordingly, the agencies
proposed to revise the time deposit size
threshold that applies to the reporting of
this information to bring it into
alignment with the SMDIA. These
proposed changes are illustrated in the
following table:

Call report schedule

Current item

Proposed revised item

Schedule RC–K, Quarterly Averages .....

Item 11.b, ‘‘Time deposits of $100,000 or more’’
Item 11.c, ‘‘Time deposits of less than $100,000’’

Schedule RI, Income Statement 16 .........

Item 2.a.(2)(b), Interest expense on ‘‘Time deposits of $100,000 or more’’.
Item 2.a.(2)(c), Interest expense on ‘‘Time deposits of less than $100,000’’.
Memorandum item 3.a, ‘‘Time deposits of less
than $100,000 with a remaining maturity or
next repricing date of’’.
Memorandum item 3.b, ‘‘Time deposits of less
than $100,000 with a remaining maturity of one
year or less’’.
Memorandum item 4.a, ‘‘Time deposits of
$100,000 or more with a remaining maturity or
next repricing date of’’.

Item 11.b, ‘‘Time deposits of $250,000 or less’’.
Item 11.c, ‘‘Time deposits of more than
$250,000’’.
Item 2.a.(2)(b), Interest expense on ‘‘Time deposits of $250,000 or less’’.
Item 2.a.(2)(c), Interest expense on ‘‘Time deposits of more than $250,000’’.
Memorandum item 3.a, ‘‘Time deposits of
$250,000 or less with a remaining maturity or
next repricing date of’’.
Memorandum item 3.b, ‘‘Time deposits of
$250,000 or less with a remaining maturity of
one year or less’’.
Memorandum item 4.a, ‘‘Time deposits of more
than $250,000 with a remaining maturity or
next repricing date of’’.

Schedule RC–E, Deposit Liabilities ........

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Schedule RI, item 5.k. Accordingly, the
agencies propose to implement these
changes effective for reporting purposes
in the first quarter of 2017.

45363

14 See
15 See

12 CFR 327.5(c)(1).
79 FR 32172 (June 4, 2014).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

16 The item numbers shown for Schedule RI are
from the FFIEC 041 report form for institutions with
domestic offices only. On the FFIEC 031 report form

Jkt 238001

PO 00000

Frm 00090

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

for institutions with domestic and foreign offices,
the item numbers are items 2.a.(1)(b)(2) and
2.a.(1)(b)(3).

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

45364

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Call report schedule

Current item

Proposed revised item

Memorandum item 4.b, ‘‘Time deposits of
$100,000 through $250,000 with a remaining
maturity of one year or less’’.
Memorandum item 4.c, ‘‘Time deposits of more
than $250,000 with a remaining maturity of one
year or less’’.

Memorandum item 4.b, ‘‘Time deposits of more
than $250,000 with a remaining maturity of one
year or less’’.

The agencies received comments on
the proposed increase in the time
deposit size threshold for the identified
items in Schedules RI, RC–K, and RC–
E from four banking organizations, one
consulting firm, and two bankers’
associations. Three banking
organizations and the two bankers’
associations supported the proposed
increase and further recommended
adjusting the deposit size threshold
used for certain other data items in
Schedule RC–E or combining certain
Schedule RC–E deposit items.
Specifically, the commenters suggested
addressing the reporting of brokered
deposit information in Memorandum
items 1.c.(1), 1.c.(2), 1.d.(1), 1.d.(2), and
1.d.(3); the reporting of total time
deposits in Memorandum items 2.b and
2.c; and the reporting of Individual
Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and Keogh
Plan accounts in Memorandum item 2.e.
In its comments on the time deposit
proposal, the fourth banking
organization described the systems
changes it would need to make to
accommodate the proposed change in
the reporting of interest expense on and
the quarterly averages for time deposits.
In response to these comments, the
agencies have reviewed their collection
and use of brokered deposit information
reported in Memorandum items 1.c.(1),
1.c.(2), 1.d.(1), 1.d.(2), and 1.d.(3), and
have determined that these items can be
revised to reflect only the $250,000
deposit size threshold. Accordingly, the
agencies propose to combine
Memorandum items 1.c.(1), ‘‘Brokered
deposits of less than $100,000,’’ and
1.c.(2), ‘‘Brokered deposits of $100,000
through $250,000 and certain brokered
retirement deposit accounts,’’ and to
collect only ‘‘Brokered deposits of
$250,000 or less (fully insured brokered
deposits).’’ 17 Further, the agencies
propose to combine Memorandum item
1.d.(1), ‘‘Brokered deposits of less than
$100,000 with a remaining maturity of
one year or less,’’ and Memorandum
item 1.d.(2), ‘‘Brokered deposits of
$100,000 through $250,000 with a
remaining maturity of one year or less,’’
and to collect only ‘‘Brokered deposits
of $250,000 or less with a remaining
17 This item would be designated Memorandum
item 1.c.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

maturity of one year or less.’’ 18 Current
Memorandum item 1.d.(3), ‘‘Brokered
deposits of more than $250,000 with a
remaining maturity of one year or less,’’
would be retained without change.
The agencies have also reviewed their
collection and use of the deposit
information reported in Memorandum
item 2.b, ‘‘Total time deposits of less
than $100,000’’; Memorandum item 2.c,
‘‘Total time deposits of $100,000
through $250,000’’; and Memorandum
item 2.e, ‘‘Individual Retirements
Accounts (IRAs) and Keogh Plan
accounts of $100,000 or more included
in Memorandum items 2.c and 2.d
above.’’ 19 The agencies have
determined that the information
reported in Memorandum items 2.b and
2.e is necessary for the calculation of the
small-denomination time deposits
component of the monetary aggregate
M2. The small-denomination time
deposits component of M2 consists of
certain time deposits at banks and
thrifts with balances less than $100,000.
In this regard, the small-denomination
time deposits component of M2
excludes IRA and Keogh Plan account
balances at depository institutions
because heavy penalties for preretirement withdrawals make these
balances too illiquid to be included in
the monetary aggregates. Because
Memorandum item 2.b includes IRA
and Keogh Plan account balances held
in time deposits of less than $100,000,
the data reported in Memorandum item
2.e is used in conjunction with the data
reported in Memorandum item 1.a,
‘‘Total Individual Retirement Accounts
(IRAs) and Keogh Plan accounts,’’ to
determine IRA and Keogh Plan account
balances of less than $100,000, which
are netted from Memorandum item 2.b
for M2 calculation purposes. Given the
aforementioned need for the continued
collection of total time deposits of less
than $100,000 in Memorandum item
2.b, the agencies have determined that
the information reported in Memoranda
item 2.c on total time deposits of
$100,000 through $250,000 remains
necessary in order for the agencies to
18 This item would be designated Memorandum
item 1.d.(1).
19 Memorandum item 2.d collects data on ‘‘Total
time deposits of more than $250,000.’’

PO 00000

Frm 00091

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

measure total time deposits within the
FDIC deposit insurance limit of
$250,000.
The proposed changes to Schedules
RC–K, RI, and RC–E shown in the table
above as well as the proposed
combining of Memorandum items
1.c.(1) and 1.c.(2) and Memorandum
items 1.d.(1) and 1.d.(2) in Schedule
RC–E would take effect March 31, 2017.
2. Level of External Auditing Work
Performed for the Reporting Institution
During the Preceding Year
Each year in the March Call Report,
each institution indicates in Schedule
RC, Balance Sheet, Memorandum item
1, the most comprehensive level of
auditing work performed by
independent external auditors during
the preceding calendar year for the
institution or its parent holding
company. In completing Memorandum
item 1, each institution selects from
nine statements describing a range of
levels of auditing work the one
statement that best describes the level of
auditing work performed for it. Certain
statements from which an institution
must choose do not reflect current
auditing practices performed in
accordance with applicable standards
and procedures promulgated by the U.S.
auditing standard setters, namely the
Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (PCAOB) and the Auditing
Standards Board (ASB) of the American
Institute of Certified Public
Accountants.
The PCAOB’s Auditing Standard No.
5 (AS 5), An Audit of Internal Control
Over Financial Reporting That Is
Integrated with An Audit of Financial
Statements, became effective for fiscal
years ending on or after November 15,
2007, and provides guidance regarding
the integration of audits of internal
control over financial reporting with
audits of financial statements for public
companies. To further emphasize the
integration of these two audits, the
PCAOB revised AS 5 in December 2010
by adding a statement that ‘‘the auditor
cannot audit internal control over
financial reporting without also auditing
the financial statements.’’ Those public
companies not required to undergo an
audit of internal control over financial

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

reporting must have an audit of their
financial statements.
The ASB provided similar guidance
in Attestation Section 501 (AT 501), An
Examination of an Entity’s Internal
Control over Financial Reporting That Is
Integrated with an Audit of Its Financial
Statements, which became effective for
integrated audits of private companies
for periods ending on or after December
15, 2008. Consistent with the PCAOB,
the ASB stated in AT 501 that ‘‘[t]he
examination of internal control should
be integrated with an audit of financial
statements’’ and ‘‘[a]n auditor should
not accept an engagement to review an
entity’s internal control or a written
assertion thereon.’’ Under the ASB’s
previous attestation standards, an entity
could engage an external auditor to
examine and attest to the effectiveness
of its internal control over financial
reporting without auditing the entity’s
financial statements. Thus, at present,
unless a private company is required to
or elects to have an integrated internal
control examination and financial
statement audit, the private company
may be required to or can choose to
have an external auditor perform an
audit of its financial statements, but it
may not engage an external auditor to
perform a standalone internal control
examination. More recently, the ASB
concluded that, because engagements
performed under AT 501 are required to
be integrated with an audit of financial
statements, it would be appropriate to
move the content of AT 501 from the
attestation standards into U.S. generally
accepted auditing standards. As a
consequence, the ASB issued Statement
on Auditing Standards No. 130, An
Audit of Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting That Is Integrated With an
Audit of Financial Statements (SAS
130), in October 2015. SAS 130 is
effective for integrated audits of private
companies for periods ending on or after
December 15, 2016, at which time AT
501 will be withdrawn.
The existing wording of statements 1,
2, and 3 of Schedule RC, Memorandum
item 1, reads as follows:
1 = Independent audit of the bank
conducted in accordance with generally
accepted auditing standards by a certified
public accounting firm which submits a
report on the bank.
2 = Independent audit of the bank’s parent
holding company conducted in accordance
with generally accepted auditing standards
by a certified public accounting firm which
submits a report on the consolidated holding
company (but not on the bank separately).
3 = Attestation on bank management’s
assertion on the effectiveness of the bank’s
internal control over financial reporting by a
certified public accounting firm.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

Because these three statements no longer
fully and properly describe the types of
external auditing services performed for
institutions or their parent holding
companies under current professional
standards and to enhance the information
institutions provide the agencies annually
about the level of external auditing work
performed for them, the agencies proposed in
their September 2015 proposal to replace
existing statements 1 and 2 with new
statements 1a, 1b, 2a, and 2b and to eliminate
existing statement 3. The revised statements
would read as follows:
1a = An integrated audit of the reporting
institution’s financial statements and its
internal control over financial reporting
conducted in accordance with the standards
of the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants (AICPA) or the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) by an
independent public accountant that submits
a report on the institution.
1b = An audit of the reporting institution’s
financial statements only conducted in
accordance with the auditing standards of the
AICPA or the PCAOB by an independent
public accountant that submits a report on
the institution.
2a = An integrated audit of the reporting
institution’s parent holding company’s
consolidated financial statements and its
internal control over financial reporting
conducted in accordance with the standards
of the AICPA or the PCAOB by an
independent public accountant that submits
a report on the consolidated holding
company (but not on the institution
separately).20
2b = An audit of the reporting institution’s
parent holding company’s consolidated
financial statements only conducted in
accordance with the auditing standards of the
AICPA or the PCAOB by an independent
public accountant that submits a report on
the consolidated holding company (but not
on the institution separately).

The agencies received comments on
the proposed revisions to the statements
about level of auditing external worked
performed for an institution from one
banking organization and two bankers’
associations. One banking organization
stated that it did not oppose the
proposed revision. The two bankers’
associations stated that they did not
object to this change, but requested that
the definition of ‘‘integrated’’ be
clarified and expanded. The agencies
will provide additional explanatory
information about the meaning of an
‘‘integrated audit’’ in the revised
instructions for Schedule RC,
20 The instructions for statement 2a would
indicate this statement also applies to a reporting
institution with $5 billion or more in total assets
and a rating lower than 2 under the Uniform
Financial Institutions Rating System that is required
by Section 36(i)(1) of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Act (12 U.S.C. 1831m(i)(1)) to have its internal
control over financial reporting audited at the
institution level, but undergoes a financial
statement audit at the consolidated holding
company level.

PO 00000

Frm 00092

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

45365

Memorandum item 1. This proposed
reporting change would take effect
March 31, 2017.
3. Chief Executive Officer Contact
Information
All reporting institutions have been
requested to provide ‘‘Emergency
Contact Information’’ as part of their
Call Report submissions since
September 2002. This information
request was added to the Call Report so
that the agencies could distribute
critical, time-sensitive information to
emergency contacts at institutions
should such a need arise. The primary
contact should be a senior official of the
institution who has decision-making
authority. The primary contact may or
may not be the institution’s Chief
Executive Officer (CEO). Information for
a secondary contact also should be
provided if such a person is available at
an institution. The emergency contact
information is for the confidential use of
the agencies and is not released to the
public.
The agencies periodically need to
communicate with the CEOs of
reporting institutions via email, but they
currently do not have a complete list of
CEO email addresses that would enable
an agency to communicate directly to
institutions’ CEOs. The CEO
communications are initiated or
approved by persons at the agencies’
senior management levels and would
involve topics including new initiatives,
policy notifications, and assessment
information.
To streamline the agencies’ CEO
communication process, the agencies
proposed to request CEO contact
information, including email addresses,
in the Call Report separately from, but
in a manner similar to, the currently
requested ‘‘Emergency Contact
Information.’’ As with the ‘‘Emergency
Contact Information,’’ the proposed CEO
contact information would be for the
confidential use of the agencies and
would not be released to the public. The
agencies intend for CEO email addresses
to be used judiciously and only for
significant matters requiring CEO-level
attention. Having a comprehensive
database of CEO contact information,
including email addresses, would allow
the agencies to communicate important
and time-sensitive information directly
to CEOs.
One banking organization commented
on the proposed reporting of CEO
contact information, stating that it was
not opposed to this proposal. The
agencies propose to implement the
collection of this information as of the
September 30, 2016, report date.

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

45366

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

4. Reporting the Legal Entity Identifier
The Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) is a
20-digit alpha-numeric code that
uniquely identifies entities that engage
in financial transactions. The recent
financial crisis spurred the development
of a global LEI system. The LEI system
is designed to facilitate several financial
stability objectives, including the
provision of higher quality and more
accurate financial data. In the United
States, the Financial Stability Oversight
Council (FSOC) has recommended that
regulators and market participants
continue to work together to improve
the quality and comprehensiveness of
financial data both nationally and
globally. In this regard, the FSOC also
has recommended that its member
agencies promote the use of the LEI in
reporting requirements and
rulemakings, where appropriate.21
Effective in 2014 and 2015, the Board
began collecting LEIs from holding
companies and certain holding
company subsidiary banking and
nonbanking legal entities in the FR Y–
6, FR Y–7, and FR Y–10 reports 22 only
if a holding company or subsidiary
entity already has an LEI. With respect
to the Call Report, the agencies
proposed to have institutions provide
their LEI on the cover page of the report
only if an institution already has an LEI.
As with the Board reports, an institution
that does not have an LEI would not be
required to obtain one for purposes of
reporting it on the Call Report.
One banking organization commented
on the proposed LEI reporting, stating
that it was not opposed to this proposal
as long as an institution without an LEI
would not be required to obtain one for
Call Report purposes. The agencies
propose to implement the collection of
LEIs on the Call Report cover page only
from institutions that already have LEIs
as of the September 30, 2016, report
date. The LEI must be a currently
issued, maintained, and valid LEI, not
an LEI that has lapsed.

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

5. Additional Preprinted Captions for
Itemizing and Describing Components
of Certain Items That Exceed Reporting
Thresholds
As mentioned above in Section III.B,
institutions are required to itemize and
describe each component of certain
items in five Call Report schedules
21 Financial Stability Oversight Council 2015
Annual Report, page 14 (http://www.treasury.gov/
initiatives/fsoc/studies-reports/Documents/
2015%20FSOC%20Annual%20Report.pdf).
22 FR Y–6, Annual Report of Holding Companies;
FR Y–7, Annual Report of Foreign Banking
Organizations; and FR Y–10, Report of Changes in
Organizational Structure (OMB Control No. 7100–
0297).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

when the component exceeds both a
specified percentage of the item and a
specified dollar amount. To simplify
and streamline the reporting of these
components and thereby reduce
reporting burden, preprinted captions
have been provided for those
components of each of these items that,
based on the agencies’ review of the
components previously reported for
these items, institutions most frequently
itemize and describe. When a
preprinted caption is provided for a
particular component of an item, an
institution is not required to report the
amount of that component when the
amount falls below the applicable
reporting thresholds.
Based on the most recent review of
the component descriptions manually
entered by reporting institutions
because preprinted captions were not
available, the agencies stated in their
September 2015 proposal that they were
planning to add one new preprinted
caption to Schedule RI–E, item 1,
‘‘Other noninterest income,’’ two new
preprinted captions to Schedule RI–E,
item 2, ‘‘Other noninterest expense,’’
and three new preprinted captions to
Schedule RC–F, item 6, ‘‘All other
assets.’’ 23 The introduction of these new
preprinted captions is intended to
simplify institutions’ compliance with
the requirement to itemize and describe
those components of these items that
exceed the applicable reporting
thresholds (which are being revised
effective September 30, 2016, as
described above in Section IV.B). The
new preprinted caption for ‘‘Other
noninterest income’’ is ‘‘Income and
fees from wire transfers.’’ The two new
preprinted captions for ‘‘Other
noninterest expense’’ are ‘‘Other real
estate owned expenses’’ and ‘‘Insurance
expenses (not included in employee
benefits, premises and fixed assets
expenses, and other real estate owned
expenses).’’ The three new preprinted
captions for ‘‘All other assets’’ are
‘‘Computer software,’’ ‘‘Accounts
receivable,’’ and ‘‘Receivables from
foreclosed government-guaranteed
mortgage loans.’’
Two banking organizations
commented on the introduction of new
preprinted captions, but raised no
objection. The agencies propose to add
the preprinted captions to the Call
Report effective September 30, 2016.
23 The addition of one of the new preprinted
captions to Schedule RC–F, item 6, is based on the
expected usage of a component resulting from the
FASB’s issuance of Accounting Standards Update
(ASU) No. 2014–14, ‘‘Classification of Certain
Government-Guaranteed Mortgage Loans upon
Foreclosure,’’ that is or soon will be in effect for all
institutions depending, in part, on their fiscal years.

PO 00000

Frm 00093

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

6. Extraordinary Items
In January 2015, the FASB issued
ASU No. 2015–01, ‘‘Simplifying Income
Statement Presentation by Eliminating
the Concept of Extraordinary Items.’’
This ASU eliminates the concept of
extraordinary items from U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles. Until
the effective date of this ASU, an entity
was required under ASC Subtopic 225–
20, Income Statement—Extraordinary
and Unusual Items (formerly
Accounting Principles Board Opinion
No. 30, ‘‘Reporting the Results of
Operations’’), to separately classify,
present, and disclose extraordinary
events and transactions. An event or
transaction was presumed to be an
ordinary and usual activity of the
reporting entity unless evidence clearly
supports its classification as an
extraordinary item. For Call Report
purposes, if an event or transaction met
the criteria for extraordinary
classification, an institution had to
segregate the extraordinary item from
the results of its ordinary operations and
report the extraordinary item in its
income statement in Schedule RI, item
11, ‘‘Extraordinary items and other
adjustments, net of income taxes.’’
ASU 2015–01 is effective for fiscal
years, and interim periods within those
fiscal years, beginning after December
15, 2015. Thus, for example, an
institution with a calendar year fiscal
year had to begin applying the ASU in
its Call Report for March 31, 2016,
unless it chose to early adopt the ASU.
After an institution adopts ASU 2015–
01, any event or transaction that would
have met the criteria for extraordinary
classification before the adoption of the
ASU should be reported in Schedule RI,
item 5.l, ‘‘Other noninterest income,’’ or
item 7.d, ‘‘Other noninterest expense,’’
as appropriate, unless the event or
transaction would otherwise be
reportable in another item of Schedule
RI.
Consistent with the elimination of the
concept of extraordinary items in ASU
2015–01, the agencies stated in the
September 2015 proposal that they
planned to revise the instructions for
Schedule RI, item 11,24 and remove the
term ‘‘extraordinary items’’ from and
revise the captions for Schedule RI, item
8, ‘‘Income (loss) before income taxes
and extraordinary items and other
adjustments,’’ item 10, ‘‘Income (loss)
before extraordinary items and other
24 The outdated reference to the reporting of the
cumulative effect of certain changes in accounting
principles in the instructions for item 11, which is
inconsistent with the guidance in the Call Report
Glossary entry for ‘‘Accounting Changes,’’ would be
deleted from the instructions.

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices
adjustments,’’ and item 11, as well as
Schedule RI–E, item 3, ‘‘Extraordinary
items and other adjustments and
applicable income tax effect.’’ 25
As an interim measure because ASU
2015–01 is already in effect for most
institutions, a footnote was added to
item 11 on Schedule RI and item 3 on
Schedule RI–E on the Call Report forms
for March 31, 2016, addressing the
elimination of the concept of
extraordinary items. The footnote
explains that the captions will be
revised at a later date and only the
results of discontinued operations
should be reported in these two items.
The agencies received no comments
on the planned changes related to
extraordinary items. Accordingly,
effective September 30, 2016, the
captions for Schedule RI, items 8, 10,
and 11, would be revised to say
‘‘Income (loss) before income taxes and
discontinued operations,’’ ‘‘Income
(loss) before discontinued operations,’’
and ‘‘Discontinued operations, net of
applicable income taxes,’’ respectively.
Similarly, the caption for Schedule RI–
E, item 3, would be revised to say,
‘‘Discontinued operations and
applicable income tax effect.’’

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

E. New and Revised Data Items of
Limited Applicability
1. Changes to Schedule RC–Q, Assets
and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value
on a Recurring Basis
Schedule RC–Q is completed by
institutions that had total assets of $500
million or more as of the beginning of
their fiscal year and by smaller
institutions that either are required to
complete Schedule RC–D, Trading
Assets and Liabilities, or have elected to
report financial instruments or servicing
assets and liabilities at fair value under
a fair value option.
Institutions that complete Schedule
RC–Q are currently required to treat
securities they have elected to report at
fair value under a fair value option as
part of their trading securities. As a
consequence, institutions include fair
value information for their fair value
option securities, if any, in Schedule
RC–Q two times: First, as part of the fair
value information they report for their
‘‘Other trading assets’’ in item 5.b of the
schedule, and then on a standalone
basis in item 5.b.(1), ‘‘Nontrading
securities at fair value with changes in
fair value reported in current earnings.’’
This reporting treatment flows from the
existing provision of the Glossary entry
for ‘‘Trading Account’’ that, as
discussed in Section III.C.2, requires an
25 Items 3.c.(1) and (2) also would be removed
from Schedule RI–E.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

institution that has elected to report
securities at fair value under a fair value
option to classify the securities as
trading securities. However, as
discussed above, the agencies proposed
in their September 2015 proposal to
remove this requirement, which would
have permitted an institution to classify
fair value option securities as held-tomaturity, available-for-sale, or trading
securities.
In its current form, Schedule RC–Q
contains an item for available-for-sale
securities along with the items
identified above for ‘‘Other trading
assets,’’ which includes securities
designated as trading securities, and
‘‘Nontrading securities at fair value with
changes in fair value reported in current
earnings.’’ However, given the existing
instructional requirements for fair value
option securities, Schedule RC–Q does
not include an item for reporting heldto-maturity securities because only
securities reported at amortized cost are
included in this category of securities.
By proposing to remove the requirement
to report fair value option securities as
trading securities, as discussed in
Section III.C.2, the agencies also
proposed in their September 2015
proposal to eliminate item 5.b.(1) of
Schedule RC–Q for nontrading
securities accounted for under a fair
value option and add a new item to
Schedule RC–Q to capture data on
‘‘Held-to-maturity securities’’ to which a
fair value option is applied.
In addition, at present, institutions
that have elected to measure loans (not
held for trading) at fair value under a
fair value option are required to report
the fair value and unpaid principal
balance of such loans in Memorandum
items 10 and 11 of Schedule RC–C, Part
I, Loans and Leases. Because Schedule
RC–C, Part I, must be completed by all
institutions, Memorandum items 10 and
11 also must be completed by all
institutions although only a nominal
number of institutions with less than
$500 million in assets have disclosed
reportable amounts for any of the
categories of fair value option loans
reported in the subitems of these two
Memorandum items. Accordingly, to
mitigate some of the reporting burden
associated with Schedule RC–C, Part I,
the agencies proposed to move
Memorandum items 10 and 11 on the
fair value and unpaid principal balance
of fair value option loans from Schedule
RC–C, Part I, to Schedule RC–Q and to
designate them as Memorandum items 3
and 4.
The agencies received comments from
two bankers’ associations seeking
further clarification of the proposed
reporting of held-to-maturity securities,

PO 00000

Frm 00094

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

45367

available-for-sale securities, and
securities for which a trading
measurement classification has been
elected in Schedule RC–Q. As stated
above in Section III.C.2, the agencies
reconsidered, and decided not to
implement, the proposed instructional
revision that would no longer have
required an institution to classify fair
value option securities as trading
securities. Based on this decision, the
agencies also will not implement the
proposed elimination of the existing
Schedule RC–Q item for nontrading
securities accounted for under a fair
value option and their proposed
addition to the schedule of a new item
for held-to-maturity securities.
The agencies received no comments
on the proposal to move the
Memorandum items in Schedule RC–C,
Part I, on the fair value and unpaid
principal balance of fair value option
loans to Schedule RC–Q, where they
would be designated as Memorandum
items 3 and 4. Therefore, the agencies
propose to proceed with this change
effective March 31, 2017.
2. Revisions to the Reporting of the
Impact on Trading Revenues of Changes
in Credit and Debit Valuation
Adjustments by Institutions With Total
Assets of $100 Billion or More
Institutions that reported average
trading assets of $2 million or more for
any quarter of the preceding calendar
year must report a breakdown of their
trading revenue (as reported in
Schedule RI, item 5.c) by underlying
risk exposure in Schedule RI,
Memorandum items 8.a though 8.e. The
five types of risk exposure are interest
rate, foreign exchange, equity security
and index, credit, and commodity and
other. Institutions required to provide
this five-way breakdown of their trading
revenue that have $100 billion or more
in total assets must also report the
‘‘Impact on trading revenue of changes
in the creditworthiness of the bank’s
derivative counterparties on the bank’s
derivative assets’’ and the ‘‘Impact on
trading revenue of changes in the
creditworthiness of the bank on the
bank’s derivative liabilities’’ in
Schedule RI, Memorandum items 8.f
and 8.g, respectively. Memorandum
items 8.f and 8.g were intended to
capture the amounts included in trading
revenue that resulted from calendar
year-to-date changes in the reporting
institution’s credit valuation
adjustments (CVA) and debit valuation
adjustments (DVA).
The agencies have found inconsistent
reporting of CVAs and DVAs by the
institutions completing Memorandum
items 8.f and 8.g of Schedule RI, which

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

45368

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

affects the analysis of reported trading
revenues. For example, some
institutions report CVAs and DVAs in
these two items on a gross basis while
other institutions report these
adjustments on a net (of hedging) basis.
Consistent reporting of the impact on
trading revenue from year-to-date
changes in CVAs and DVAs is necessary
to ensure the accuracy of the data
available to examiners for planning and
conducting safety and soundness
examinations of institutions’ trading
activities and to the agencies for their
analyses of derivatives and trading
activities, and changes therein, at the
industry and institution level.
To enhance the quality of the trading
revenue information reported by the
largest institutions in the United States,
promote consistency across institutions
in the reporting of CVAs and DVAs,
enable examiners to make more
informed judgments about institutions’
effectiveness in managing CVA and
DVA risks, and provide a more complete
picture of reported trading revenue, the
agencies proposed in their September
2015 proposal to replace existing
Memorandum items 8.f and 8.g of
Schedule RI with a tabular set of data
items. As proposed by the agencies,
institutions meeting the criteria for
completing Memorandum items 8.f and
8.g would begin to separately present
their gross CVAs and DVAs
(Memorandum items 8.f.(1) and 8.g.(1))
and any related CVA and DVA hedging
results (Memorandum items 8.f.(2) and
8.g.(2)) in the table by type of
underlying risk exposure (columns A
through E). These institutions also
would report their gross trading revenue
by type of underlying risk exposure
before including positive or negative net
CVAs and net DVAs in columns A
through E of a proposed new
Memorandum item 8.h, ‘‘Gross trading
revenue.’’ For purposes of this proposed
tabular set of data items, the September
2015 proposal would have required
CVA and DVA amounts, as well as their
hedges, to be allocated to the type of
underlying risk exposure (e.g., interest
rates, foreign exchange, and equity) that
gives rise to the CVA and the DVA.
In proposing that certain institutions
with assets of $100 billion or more
report expanded information on the
impact on trading revenues of changes
in CVAs and DVAs, related hedging
results, and gross trading revenues, the
agencies requested comment on the
availability of these data by type of
underlying risk exposure.
The agencies received comments on
this trading revenue proposal from one
consulting firm and two bankers’
associations. The consulting firm

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

welcomed the proposal. The bankers’
associations commented that the
agencies’ proposed approach for
reporting the impact on trading
revenues of changes in CVAs and DVAs
differs from how many banks currently
report their CVAs and DVAs. As a
result, these banks ‘‘do not currently
have the capability to calculate this
information by type of underlying risk
exposures.’’ The associations stated that
building and testing the systems and
processes necessary to enable banks to
report the trading revenue information
in the manner proposed by the agencies
would require a delay in the
implementation date of not less than
one year beyond the effective date
proposed by the agencies for the initial
reporting of this information. The
associations also requested that the
agencies provide greater clarity and
specificity in the instructions for the
proposed expansion of trading revenue
information by type of underlying risk
exposure.
To address the bankers’ associations’
comments, the agencies have revised
their proposal to eliminate the reporting
by type of underlying risk exposure. As
revised, institutions required to
complete Schedule RI, Memorandum
items 8.f and 8.g (i.e., institutions that
reported average trading assets of $2
million or more for any quarter of the
preceding calendar year and have $100
billion or more in total assets), would
separately present the year-to-date
changes in gross CVAs and DVAs in
new Memorandum items 8.f.(1) and
8.g.(1), respectively, and any related
year-to-date CVA and DVA hedging
results in Memorandum items 8.f.(2)
and 8.g.(2), respectively. The
instructions for these items would
explain that when CVA and DVA are
components in a bilateral valuation
adjustment calculation for a derivatives
counterparty, the year-to-date change in
the gross CVA component and the gross
DVA component for that counterparty
should be reported in items 8.f.(1) and
8.g.(1), respectively.
Institutions required to complete
Memorandum items 8.f and 8.g also
would report as ‘‘Gross trading revenue’’
in new Memorandum item 8.h the yearto-date results of their trading activities
before the impact of any year-to-date
changes in valuation adjustments,
including, but not limited to, CVA and
DVA. The amount reported as gross
trading revenue in Memorandum item
8.h plus or minus all year-to-date
changes in valuation adjustments
should equal Schedule RI, item 5.c,
‘‘Trading revenue.’’
The agencies propose to implement
Memorandum items 8.f and 8.g and new

PO 00000

Frm 00095

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Memorandum item 8.h of Schedule RI,
as revised in response to comments
received, in the Call Report for March
31, 2017.
3. Dually Payable Deposits in Foreign
Branches of U.S. Banks
Under the Federal Deposit Insurance
Act (FDI Act), deposit obligations
carried on the books and records of
foreign branches of U.S. banks are not
considered deposits, unless the funds
are payable both in the foreign branch
and at an office of the bank in the
United States (that is, they are dually
payable). In September 2013, the FDIC
issued a final rule amending its deposit
insurance regulations to clarify that
deposits carried on the books and
records of a foreign branch of a U.S.
bank are not insured deposits even if
they are made payable both at that
branch and at an office of the bank in
any state of the United States.26 In
addition, the final rule provides an
exception for Overseas Military Banking
Facilities operated under Department of
Defense regulations.
The final rule does not affect the
ability of a U.S. bank to make a foreign
deposit dually payable. Should a bank
do so, its foreign branch deposits would
be treated as deposit liabilities under
the FDI Act’s depositor preference
regime in the same way as, and on an
equal footing with, domestic uninsured
deposits. In general, ‘‘depositor
preference’’ refers to a resolution
distribution regime in which the claims
of depositors have priority over (that is,
are satisfied before) the claims of
general unsecured creditors. Thus, if
deposits held in foreign branches of U.S.
banks located outside the United States
are made dually payable, that is, made
payable at both the foreign office and a
branch of the bank located in the United
States, the holders of such deposits
would receive depositor preference in
the event of the U.S. bank’s failure.
To enable the FDIC to monitor the
volume and trend of dually payable
deposits in the foreign branches of U.S.
banks, the agencies proposed to add a
new Memorandum item 2 to Schedule
RC–E, Part II, Deposits in Foreign
Offices, on the FFIEC 031 Call Report.
The FFIEC 031 is applicable only to
banks with foreign offices. The
proposed new information on the
amount of dually payable deposits at
foreign branches of U.S. banks would
enable the FDIC to determine, as
required by statute, the least costly
method of resolving a particular bank if
it fails and the potential loss to the
Deposit Insurance Fund. This requires
26 See

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

78 FR 56583 (September 13, 2013).

13JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices
the FDIC to plan for the distribution of
the proceeds from the liquidation of the
failed bank’s assets, including
consideration not only of insured
deposits, but also other deposit
liabilities for purposes of depositor
preference, such as domestic uninsured
deposits and dually payable deposits in
foreign branches of the particular U.S.
bank, which take priority over general
unsecured liabilities.
The agencies received no comments
on the proposed reporting of dually
payable deposits at foreign branches of
U.S. banks. The collection of this data
item would be implemented as of
September 30, 2016, but it would be
added to the FFIEC 031 Call Report as
Memorandum item 4 of Schedule RC–O,
Other Data for Deposit Insurance and
FICO Assessments, rather than as
Memorandum item 2 of Schedule RC–E,
Part II.
4. Revisions To Implement the
Supplementary Leverage Ratio for
Advanced Approaches Institutions

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Schedule RC–R, Part I, Regulatory
Capital Components and Ratios, item
45, applies to the reporting of the
supplementary leverage ratio (SLR) by
advanced approaches institutions.27 In
the sample Call Report forms and the
Call Report instruction book for report
dates before March 31, 2015, the caption
for item 45 and the instructions for this
item both indicated that, effective for
report dates on or after January 1, 2015,
advanced approaches institutions
should begin to report their SLR in the
Call Report as calculated for purposes of
Schedule A, item 98, of the FFIEC 101,
Regulatory Capital Reporting for
Institutions Subject to the Advanced
Capital Adequacy Framework.28
However, the agencies suspended the
collection of Schedule RC–R, Part I,
item 45, before it took effect March 31,
2015, due to amendments to the SLR
27 In general, an advanced approaches institution
(i) has consolidated total assets (excluding assets
held by an insurance underwriting subsidiary) on
its most recent year-end regulatory report equal to
$250 billion or more; (ii) has consolidated total onbalance sheet foreign exposure on its most recent
year-end regulatory report equal to $10 billion or
more (excluding exposures held by an insurance
underwriting subsidiary); (iii) is a subsidiary of a
depository institution that uses the advanced
approaches to calculate its total risk-weighted
assets; (iv) is a subsidiary of a bank holding
company or savings and loan holding company that
uses the advanced approaches to calculate its total
risk-weighted assets; or (v) elects to use the
advanced approaches to calculate its total riskweighted assets.
28 OMB control numbers for the FFIEC 101: For
the OCC, 1557–0239; for the Board, 7100–0319; and
for the FDIC, 3064–0159.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

rule 29 and the need for updates to the
associated SLR data collection in the
FFIEC 101.
In July 2015, the agencies finalized
the most recent revisions to the SLR
rule, which requires all advanced
approaches institutions to disclose three
items: The numerator of the SLR (Tier
1 capital, which is already reported in
Call Report Schedule RC–R), the
denominator of the SLR (total leverage
exposure), and the ratio itself.30 As part
of the proposed revisions to the FFIEC
101, the SLR section of the FFIEC 101
will apply only to top-tier advanced
approaches institutions (generally, bank
and savings and loan holding
companies), and not to their subsidiary
depository institutions.31 Therefore,
lower tier advanced approaches
depository institutions generally will
not report SLR data in the FFIEC 101,
but will need to do so in the Call Report,
which would satisfy the SLR disclosure
requirement in the revised SLR rule.32
Thus, the agencies proposed to add a
new item 45.a to Schedule RC–R, Part
I, in which an advanced approaches
depository institution (regardless of
parallel run status) would report total
leverage exposure as calculated under
the agencies’ SLR rule.
The agencies also proposed to
renumber current item 45 of Schedule
RC–R, Part I, as item 45.b, to collect an
institution’s SLR. The ratio to be
reported in item 45.b would equal Tier
1 capital reported on Schedule RC–R,
Part I, item 26, divided by total leverage
exposure reported in proposed item
45.a. Renumbered item 45.b would no
longer reference the FFIEC 101 because
lower tier depository institutions would
no longer be calculating or reporting
their SLRs in the FFIEC 101.
The agencies received one comment
from a consulting firm that welcomed
the reinstatement of SLR information in
the Call Report. The reporting of SLR
information in items 45.a and 45.b of
Call Report Schedule RC–R would take
effect September 30, 2016.
29 See 79 FR 57725 (September 26, 2014). The
amendments to the SLR rule took effect January 1,
2015.
30 See 80 FR 41409 (July 15, 2015). The disclosure
requirement is set forth in the agencies’ regulatory
capital rules (12 CFR 3.172 (OCC); 12 CFR 217.172
(Board), and 12 CFR 324.172 (FDIC)).
31 See 81 FR 22702 (April 18, 2016) as corrected
in 81 FR 24940 (April 27, 2016).
32 Because certain depository institutions are
exempt from filing the FFIEC 101, but must still
report their SLR numerator, denominator, and ratio,
the agencies proposed the depository institutionlevel collection of SLR data in the Call Report rather
than in the FFIEC 101.

PO 00000

Frm 00096

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

45369

IV. Summary of the Effective Dates for
the Proposed Revisions
The list below summarizes the
effective dates for each of the Call
Report changes included in the
agencies’ September 2015 proposal (and
an additional instructional revision
proposed by a banking organization) as
discussed above in the preceding
section of this notice.
The following proposed Call Report
revisions would take effect September
30, 2016:
• Deletions of certain existing data
items pertaining to troubled debt
restructurings from Schedules RC–C,
Part I, and RC–N; loans covered by FDIC
loss-sharing agreements from Schedules
RC–M and RC–N; and unused
commitments to asset-backed
commercial paper conduits with an
original maturity of one year or less in
Schedule RC–R, Part II;
• Increases in existing reporting
thresholds for certain data items in
Schedules RI–E, RC–D, RC–F, RC–G,
and RC–Q and the establishment of a
reporting threshold for certain data
items in Schedule RC–S;
• An instructional revision
addressing the reporting of the custodial
bank deduction in Schedule RC–O;
• New and revised data items and
information of general applicability,
including:
Æ Adding contact information for the
reporting institution’s Chief Executive
Officer;
Æ Reporting the Legal Entity Identifier
for the reporting institution (on the Call
Report cover page) if the institution
already has one;
Æ Creating additional preprinted
captions for itemizing and describing
components of certain items that exceed
reporting thresholds in Schedules RC–F
and RI–E; and
Æ Eliminating the concept of
extraordinary items and revising
affected data items in Schedules RI and
RI–E; and
• New and revised data items of
limited applicability, including:
Æ Adding a new item on ‘‘dually
payable’’ deposits in foreign branches of
U.S. banks to Schedule RC–O on the
FFIEC 031 report; and
Æ Revising the information reported
about the supplementary leverage ratio
by advanced approaches institutions in
Schedule RC–R, Part I.
The following proposed Call Report
revisions would take effect March 31,
2017:
• Deletions of certain existing data
items pertaining to other-thantemporary impairments from Schedule
RI;

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1

jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

45370

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

• An instructional revision
addressing the reporting of net gains
(losses) and other-than-temporary
impairments on equity securities that do
not have readily determinable fair
values on the Call Report income
statement;
• New and revised data items of
general applicability, including:
Æ Increasing the time deposit size
threshold used to report certain deposit
information from $100,000 to $250,000
in Schedules RC–E, RI, and RC–K;
Æ Revising the statements used to
describe the level of external auditing
work performed for the reporting
institution during the preceding year in
Schedule RC; and
• New and revised data items of
limited applicability, including:
Æ Moving the existing Memorandum
items for the fair value and unpaid
principal balance of loans (not held for
trading) measured under a fair value
option from Schedule RC–C, Part I, to
Schedule RC–Q; and
Æ Revising the information reported
in Schedule RI by certain institutions
with total assets of $100 billion or more
on the impact on trading revenues of
changes in credit and debit valuation
adjustments and adding a new item for
gross trading revenue.
The agencies are not proceeding with
the following elements of the September
2015 proposal:
• Proposed instructional
clarifications addressing the reporting of
securities for which a fair value option
is elected for measurement purposes on
the Call Report balance sheet and the
reporting of home equity lines of credit
that convert from revolving to nonrevolving status in Schedule RC–C, Part
I, and certain other schedules; and
• Revisions to the reporting of certain
securities measured under a fair value
option in Schedule RC–Q.
For the September 30, 2016, and
March 31, 2017, report dates, as
applicable, institutions may provide
reasonable estimates for any new or
revised Call Report data item initially
required to be reported as of that date
for which the requested information is
not readily available. The specific
wording of the captions for the new or
revised Call Report data items discussed
in this notice and the numbering of
these data items should be regarded as
preliminary.
V. Request for Comment
Public comment is requested on all
aspects of this joint notice. Comments
are invited on:
(a) Whether the proposed revisions to
the collections of information that are
the subject of this notice are necessary

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:08 Jul 12, 2016

Jkt 238001

for the proper performance of the
agencies’ functions, including whether
the information has practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the agencies’
estimates of the burden of the
information collections as they are
proposed to be revised, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(c) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected;
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of
information collections on respondents,
including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; and
(e) Estimates of capital or start up
costs and costs of operation,
maintenance, and purchase of services
to provide information.
Comments submitted in response to
this joint notice will be shared among
the agencies. All comments will become
a matter of public record.
Dated: July 7, 2016.
Karen Solomon,
Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency.
Dated: July 1, 2016.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Secretary of the Board, Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System.
Dated at Washington, DC, this 5th day of
July 2016.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary, Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2016–16533 Filed 7–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–33–P; 6210–01–P; 6714–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request for Regulation Project
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:

The Department of the
Treasury, as part of its continuing effort
to reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, invites the general public and
other Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on proposed
and/or continuing information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is
soliciting comments regulations
governing practice before the Internal
Revenue.

SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00097

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Written comments should be
received on or before September 12,
2016 to be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to Tuawana Pinkston, Internal Revenue
Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the regulation should be
directed to Allan Hopkins at Internal
Revenue Service, Room 6129, 1111
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20224, or through the internet at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Regulations Governing Practice
Before the Internal Revenue Service.
OMB Number: 1545–1726.
Regulation Project Number: REG–
111835–00.
Abstract: These regulations affect
individuals who are eligible to practice
before the Internal Revenue Service.
These regulations also authorize the
Director of Practice to act upon
applications for enrollment to practice
before the Internal Revenue Service. The
Director of Practice will use certain
information to ensure that: (1) Enrolled
agents properly complete continuing
education requirements to obtain
renewal; (2) practitioners properly
obtain consent of taxpayers before
representing conflicting interests; (3)
practitioners do not use e-commerce to
make misleading solicitations.
Current Actions: There is no change to
this existing regulation.
Type of Review: Reinstatement of a
previously approved collection.
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
718,400.
Estimated Time per Respondent: 2
hours, 28 minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 1,777,125.
The following paragraph applies to all
of the collections of information covered
by this notice:
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless the collection of information
displays a valid OMB control number.
Books or records relating to a collection
of information must be retained as long
as their contents may become material
in the administration of any internal
revenue law. Generally, tax returns and
tax return information are confidential,
as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
Request for Comments: Comments
submitted in response to this notice will
be summarized and/or included in the
request for OMB approval. All
DATES:

E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM

13JYN1