Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income

FFIEC
Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council
Arlington, VA 22226

CALL REPORT DATE: June 30, 2018
SECOND 2018 CALL, NUMBER 284

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS
June 2018 Call Report Materials
Burden-reducing revisions to all three versions of the Call Report (FFIEC 031, FFIEC 041, and FFIEC 051) are
being implemented this quarter. These revisions consist of removing or consolidating data items, adding new
or raising certain existing reporting thresholds, and reducing the frequency of reporting certain data items. In
addition, all institutions with consolidated total assets of $100 billion or more that do not have foreign offices must
begin filing the FFIEC 031 report instead of the FFIEC 041 report this quarter. Two new topics have been added
to the Supplemental Instructions for June 2018: “Reporting High Volatility Commercial Real Estate (HVCRE)
Exposures” and “Reporting Reciprocal Deposits.”
Separate updates to the instruction book for the FFIEC 051 Call Report and the instruction book for the
FFIEC 031 and FFIEC 041 Call Reports for June 2018 will soon be available for printing and downloading from
the FFIEC’s website (https://www.ffiec.gov/ffiec_report_forms.htm) and the FDIC’s website
(https://www.fdic.gov/callreports). Sample FFIEC 051, FFIEC 041, and FFIEC 031 Call Report forms,
including the cover (signature) page, for June 2018 can be printed and downloaded from these websites.
In addition, institutions that use Call Report software generally can print paper copies of blank forms from their
software. Please ensure that the individual responsible for preparing the Call Report at your institution has
been notified about the electronic availability of the June 2018 report forms, instruction book updates, and
these Supplemental Instructions. The locations of changes to the text of the previous quarter’s Supplemental
Instructions (except references to the quarter-end report date) are identified by a vertical line in the right
margin.
Submission of Completed Reports
Each institution’s Call Report data must be submitted to the FFIEC's Central Data Repository (CDR), an
Internet-based system for data collection (https://cdr.ffiec.gov/cdr/), using one of the two methods described
in the banking agencies' Financial Institution Letter (FIL) for the June 30, 2018, report date. The CDR Help
Desk is available from 9:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, to provide assistance
with user accounts, passwords, and other CDR system-related issues. The CDR Help Desk can be reached
by telephone at (888) CDR-3111, by fax at (703) 774-3946, or by e-mail at [email protected].
Institutions are required to maintain in their files a signed and attested hard-copy record of the Call Report data
file submitted to the CDR. The appearance of this hard-copy record of the submitted data file need not match
exactly the appearance of the sample report forms on the FFIEC’s website, but the hard-copy record should
show at least the caption of each Call Report item and the reported amount. A copy of the cover page printed
from Call Report software or from the FFIEC’s website should be used to fulfill the signature and attestation
requirement. The signed cover page should be attached to the hard-copy record of the Call Report data file
that must be placed in the institution's files.
Currently, Call Report preparation software products marketed by (in alphabetical order) Axiom Software
Laboratories, Inc.; DBI Financial Systems, Inc.; Fed Reporter, Inc.; FIS Compliance Solutions; FiServ, Inc.;
KPMG LLP; Lombard Risk; SHAZAM Core Services; and Wolters Kluwer Financial Services meet the
technical specifications for producing Call Report data files that are able to be processed by the CDR.
Contact information for these vendors is provided on the final page of these Supplemental Instructions.
Reporting High Volatility Commercial Real Estate (HVCRE) Exposures
Section 214 of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA), which
was enacted on May 24, 2018, adds a new Section 51 to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act)
governing the risk-based capital requirements for certain acquisition, development, or construction (ADC)
loans. EGRRCPA provides that, effective upon enactment, the banking agencies may only require a
depository institution to assign a heightened risk weight to an HVCRE exposure if such exposure is an
1

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

“HVCRE ADC Loan,” as defined in this new law. Accordingly, an institution is permitted to risk weight at
150 percent only those commercial real estate exposures it believes meet the statutory definition of an
“HVCRE ADC Loan.” When reporting HVCRE exposures in the Call Report regulatory capital schedule
(Schedule RC-R) as of June 30, 2018, and subsequent report dates, institutions may use available information
to reasonably estimate and report only “HVCRE ADC Loans” held for sale and held for investment in Schedule
RC-R, Part II, items 4.b and 5.b, respectively. Any “HVCRE ADC Loans” held for trading would be reported in
Schedule RC-R, Part II, item 7. The portion of any “HVCRE ADC Loan” that is secured by collateral or has a
guarantee that qualifies for a risk weight lower than 150 percent may continue to be assigned a lower risk
weight when completing Schedule RC-R, Part II. Institutions may refine their estimates of “HVCRE ADC
Loans” in good faith as they obtain additional information, but they will not be required to amend Call Reports
previously filed for report dates on or after June 30, 2018, as these estimates are adjusted.
Alternatively, institutions may continue to report and risk weight HVCRE exposures in a manner consistent
with the current Call Report instructions for Schedule RC-R, Part II, until the agencies take further action.
Section 214 of EGRRCPA, which includes the definition of “HVCRE ADC Loan,” is provided in the Appendix to
these Supplemental Instructions for your reference.
Reporting Reciprocal Deposits
Section 202 of EGRRCPA amends Section 29 of the FDI Act to exclude a capped amount of reciprocal
deposits from treatment as brokered deposits for qualifying institutions, effective upon enactment. The current
Call Report instructions, consistent with the law prior to the enactment of EGRRCPA, treat all reciprocal
deposits as brokered deposits. Institutions that wish to report pursuant to the new law for the June 30, 2018,
Call Report should apply the newly defined terms and other provisions of Section 202 of EGRRCPA (provided
in the Appendix to these Supplemental Instructions for your reference) to determine whether an institution
and its reciprocal deposits are eligible for the statutory exclusion. Qualifying institutions may use available
information to then reasonably estimate and report as brokered deposits (in Schedule RC-E, Memorandum
items 1.b through 1.d), and reciprocal brokered deposits (in Schedule RC-O, item 9 and, if applicable,
item 9.a), only those reciprocal deposits that are still considered brokered deposits under the new law.
Alternatively, when reporting as of June 30, 2018, institutions may continue to report reciprocal deposits in
Schedules RC-E and RC-O consistent with the current Call Report instructions (i.e., those instructions in effect
prior to passage of EGRRCPA).
The FFIEC anticipates issuing additional instructions regarding the application of Section 202 to reciprocal
deposits for purposes of reporting in the Call Report for September 30, 2018. Institutions that wish to amend
their reporting of reciprocal deposits still considered brokered deposits in their reports as originally filed for
June 30, 2018, may use these additional instructions as the basis for their amended reports.
Accounting and Reporting Implications of the New Tax Law
On January 18, 2018, the banking agencies issued an Interagency Statement on Accounting and Reporting
Implications of the New Tax Law. The tax law was enacted on December 22, 2017, and is commonly known
as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the Act). U.S. GAAP requires the effect of changes in tax laws or rates to be
recognized in the period in which the legislation is enacted. Thus, in accordance with Accounting Standards
Codification (ASC) Topic 740, Income Taxes, the effects of the Act were to be recorded in an institution’s
Call Report for December 31, 2017, because the Act was enacted before year-end 2017. Changes in deferred
tax assets (DTAs) and deferred tax liabilities (DTLs) resulting from the Act’s lower corporate income tax rate
and other applicable provisions of the Act were to be reflected in an institution’s income tax expense in the
period of enactment, i.e., the year-end 2017 Call Report. Institutions should refer to the Interagency
Statement for guidance on the remeasurement of DTAs and DTLs, assessing the need for valuation
allowances for DTAs, the effect of the remeasurement of DTAs and DTLs on amounts recognized in
accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI), the use for Call Report purposes of the measurement
period approach described in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118
and a related FASB Staff Q&A, and regulatory capital effects of the new tax law.

2

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

The Interagency Statement notes that the remeasurement of the DTA or DTL associated with an item reported
in AOCI, such as unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale (AFS) securities, results in a disparity
between the tax effect of the item included in AOCI and the amount recorded as a DTA or DTL for the tax
effect of this item. However, when the new tax law was enacted, ASC Topic 740 did not specify how this
disproportionate, or “stranded,” tax effect should be resolved. The Interagency Statement reported that the
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) had approved issuing an Exposure Draft of a proposed
Accounting Standards Update (ASU) that would allow reclassification of the disproportionate tax effect from
AOCI to retained earnings in financial statements that had not yet been issued. The Interagency Statement
advised institutions that they were permitted to apply the guidance proposed in the ASU to remedy the
disproportionate tax effects of items reported in AOCI when they prepared their Call Reports for December 31,
2017.
On February 18, 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, “Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income,” which allows institutions to eliminate the stranded tax effects
resulting from the Act by electing to reclassify these tax effects from AOCI to retained earnings. Thus, this
reclassification is permitted, but not required. ASU 2018-02 is effective for all entities for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption of the ASU is
permitted, including in any interim period, as specified in the ASU. An institution electing to reclassify its
stranded tax effects for U.S. GAAP financial reporting purposes should also reclassify these stranded tax
effects in the same period for Call Report purposes. For additional information, institutions should refer to
ASU 2018-02, which is available at
http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1176170041017&acceptedDisclaimer=true.
An institution that elects to reclassify the disproportionate, or stranded, tax effects of items within AOCI to
retained earnings should not report any amounts associated with this reclassification in Call Report
Schedule RI-A, Changes in Bank Equity Capital, because the reclassification is between two accounts within
the equity capital section of Schedule RC, Balance Sheet, and does not result in any change in the total
amount of equity capital.
When discussing the regulatory capital effects of the new tax law, the Interagency Statement explains that
temporary difference DTAs that could be realized through net operating loss (NOL) carrybacks are treated
differently from those that could not be realized through NOL carrybacks (i.e., those for which realization
depends on future taxable income) under the agencies’ regulatory capital rules. These latter temporary
differences DTAs are deducted from common equity tier 1 (CET1) capital if they exceed certain CET1 capital
deduction thresholds. However, for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2018, the Act generally
removes the ability to use NOL carrybacks to recover federal income taxes paid in prior tax years. Thus,
except as noted in the following sentence, for such tax years, the realization of all federal temporary difference
DTAs will be dependent on future taxable income and these DTAs would be subject to the CET1 capital
deduction thresholds. Nevertheless, consistent with current practice under the regulatory capital rules, when
an institution has paid federal income taxes for the current tax year, if all federal temporary differences were to
fully reverse as of the report date during the current tax year and create a hypothetical federal tax loss that
would enable the institution to recover federal income taxes paid in the current tax year, the federal temporary
difference DTAs that could be realized from this source may be treated as temporary difference DTAs
realizable through NOL carrybacks as of the regulatory capital calculation date.
Presentation of Net Benefit Cost in the Income Statement
In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-07, “Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost
and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost,” which requires an employer to disaggregate the service cost
component from the other components of the net benefit cost of defined benefit plans. In addition, the ASU
requires these other cost components to be presented in the income statement separately from the service
cost component, which must be reported with the other compensation costs arising during the reporting period.
For institutions that are public business entities, as defined under U.S. GAAP, ASU 2017-07 is effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. For
institutions that are not public business entities (i.e., that are private companies), the ASU is effective for fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Early

3

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

adoption is permitted as described in the ASU. Refer to the Glossary entries for “public business entity” and
“private company” in the Call Report instructions for further information on these terms.
For Call Report purposes, an institution should apply the new standard prospectively to the cost components
of net benefit cost as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The service cost component of net benefit
cost should be reported in Schedule RI, item 7.a, “Salaries and employee benefits.” The other cost
components of net benefit cost should be reported in Schedule RI, item 7.d, “Other noninterest expense.”
For additional information, institutions should refer to ASU 2017-07, which is available at
http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1176168888120&acceptedDisclaimer=true.
Credit Losses on Financial Instruments
In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments,”
which introduces the current expected credit losses methodology (CECL) for estimating allowances for credit
losses. Under CECL, an allowance for credit losses is a valuation account, measured as the difference
between the financial assets’ amortized cost basis and the net amount expected to be collected on the
financial assets (i.e., lifetime credit losses). To estimate expected credit losses under CECL, institutions will
use a broader range of data than under existing U.S. GAAP. These data include information about past
events, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts relevant to assessing the collectability
of the cash flows of financial assets.
The ASU is applicable to all financial instruments measured at amortized cost (including loans held for
investment, net investments in leases, and held-to-maturity debt securities, as well as trade and reinsurance
receivables and receivables that relate to repurchase agreements and securities lending agreements) and
off-balance-sheet credit exposures not accounted for as insurance, including loan commitments, standby
letters of credit, and financial guarantees. The new standard does not apply to trading assets, loans held for
sale, financial assets for which the fair value option has been elected, or loans and receivables between
entities under common control.
The ASU also modifies the treatment of credit impairment on AFS debt securities. Under the new standard,
institutions will recognize a credit loss on an AFS debt security through an allowance for credit losses, rather
than the current practice required by U.S. GAAP of write-downs of individual securities for other-thantemporary impairment.
For institutions that are public business entities and are also U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
filers, as both terms are defined in U.S. GAAP, the ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. For public business entities that are
not SEC filers, the ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020, including interim
periods within those fiscal years. For institutions that are not public business entities (i.e., that are private
companies), the ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020, and for interim periods of
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2021. For all institutions, early application of the new standard is
permitted for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal
years. Institutions must apply ASU 2016-13 for Call Report purposes in accordance with the effective dates
set forth in the ASU. An institution that early adopts ASU 2016-13 for U.S. GAAP financial reporting purposes
should also early adopt the ASU in the same period for Call Report purposes.
The Call Report forms and instructions will be revised to conform to the ASU at a future date, and the agencies
will request comment on the proposed revisions through a Federal Register notice.
For additional information, institutions should refer to the agencies’ Frequently Asked Questions on the New
Accounting Standard on Financial Instruments – Credit Losses, which were most recently updated on
September 6, 2017, the agencies’ June 17, 2016, Joint Statement on the New Accounting Standard on
Financial Instruments – Credit Losses, and ASU 2016-13, which is available at
http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1176168232528&acceptedDisclaimer=true.

4

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

Accounting for Hedging Activities
In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, “Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging
Activities.” This ASU amends ASC Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, to “better align an entity’s risk
management activities and financial reporting for hedging relationships through changes to both the
designation and measurement guidance for qualifying hedging relationships and the presentation of hedge
results.”
For institutions that are public business entities, as defined under U.S. GAAP, the ASU is effective for fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. For institutions
that are not public business entities (i.e., that are private companies), the ASU is effective for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2020. Refer to the
Glossary entries for “public business entity” and “private company” in the Call Report instructions for further
information on these terms.
Early application of the ASU is permitted for all institutions in any interim period or fiscal year before the
effective date of the ASU. Further, the ASU specifies transition requirements and offers transition elections for
hedging relationships existing on the date of adoption (i.e., hedging relationships in which the hedging
instrument has not expired, been sold, terminated, or exercised or for which the institution has not removed
the designation of the hedging relationship). These transition requirements and elections should be applied on
the date of adoption of the ASU and the effect of adoption should be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal
year of adoption (i.e., the initial application date). Thus, if an institution early adopts the ASU in an interim
period, any adjustments shall be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes the interim period
of adoption, e.g., as of January 1 for a calendar year institution. An institution that early adopts ASU 2017-12
in an interim period for U.S. GAAP financial reporting purposes should also early adopt the ASU in the same
period for Call Report purposes.
The Call Report instructions, including the Glossary entry for “Derivative Contracts,” will be revised to conform
to the ASU at a future date.
For additional information, institutions should refer to ASU 2017-12, which is available at
http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1176169282347&acceptedDisclaimer=true.
Regulatory Capital Treatment of Certain Centrally-Cleared Derivative Contracts
On August 14, 2017, the banking agencies issued supervisory guidance on the regulatory capital treatment of
certain centrally-cleared derivative contracts in light of recent changes to the rulebooks of certain central
counterparties. Under the previous requirements of these central counterparties’ rulebooks, variation margin
transferred to cover the exposure that arises from marking cleared derivative contracts, and netting sets of
such contracts, to fair value was considered collateral pledged by one party to the other, with title to the
collateral remaining with the posting party. These derivative contracts are referred to as collateralized-tomarket contracts. Under the revised rulebooks of certain central counterparties, variation margin for certain
centrally-cleared derivative contracts, and certain netting sets of such contracts, is considered a settlement
payment for the exposure that arises from marking these derivative contracts and netting sets to fair value,
with title to the payment transferring to the receiving party. In these circumstances, the derivative contracts
and netting sets are referred to as settled-to-market contracts.
Under the agencies’ regulatory capital rules, in general, an institution must calculate the trade exposure
amount for a cleared derivative contract, or a netting set of such contracts, by using the methodology
described in section 34 of the rules to determine (i) the current credit exposure and (ii) the potential future
exposure of the derivative contract or netting set of such contracts for purposes of the standardized approach
risk-based capital calculation and the supplementary leverage ratio calculation. The risk-weighted asset
calculations under the advanced approaches capital framework have similar requirements. Current credit
exposure is determined by reference to the fair value of each derivative contract as measured under U.S.
GAAP. Potential future exposure is determined, in part, by multiplying each derivative contract’s notional
principal amount by a conversion factor. The conversion factors vary by the category (for example, interest
rate, equity) and remaining maturity of the derivative contract. The regulatory capital rules provide that, for a
derivative contract that is structured such that on specified dates any outstanding exposure is settled and the
5

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

terms are reset so that the fair value of the contract is zero, the remaining maturity equals the time until the
next reset date.
For the purpose of the regulatory capital rules, the August 2017 supervisory guidance states that if, after
accounting and legal analysis, an institution determines that (i) the variation margin payment on a centrally
cleared settled-to-market contract settles any outstanding exposure on the contract, and (ii) the terms are
reset so that the fair value of the contract is zero, the remaining maturity on such a contract would equal the
time until the next exchange of variation margin on the contract. In conducting its legal analysis to determine
whether variation margin may be considered settlement of outstanding exposure under the regulatory capital
rules, an institution should evaluate whether the transferor of the variation margin has relinquished all legal
claims to the variation margin and whether the payment of variation margin constitutes settlement under the
central counterparty’s rulebook, any other applicable agreements governing the derivative contract, and
applicable law. Among other requirements, a central counterparty’s rulebook may require an institution to
satisfy additional obligations, such as payment of other expenses and fees, in order to recognize payment of
variation margin as satisfying settlement under the rulebook. The legal and accounting analysis performed by
the institution should take all such requirements into account.
Institutions should refer to the supervisory guidance in its entirety for purposes of determining the appropriate
regulatory capital treatment of settled-to-market contracts under the regulatory capital rules. This guidance is
available at https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2017/fil17033a.pdf.
Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities
In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-08, “Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt
Securities.” This ASU amends ASC Subtopic 310-20, Receivables – Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs
(formerly FASB Statement No. 91, “Accounting for Nonrefundable Fees and Costs Associated with Originating
or Acquiring Loans and Initial Direct Costs of Leases”), by shortening the amortization period for premiums on
callable debt securities that have explicit, non-contingent call features and are callable at fixed prices and on
preset dates. Under existing U.S. GAAP, the premium on such a callable debt security generally is required to
be amortized as an adjustment of yield over the contractual life of the debt security. Under the ASU, the
excess of the amortized cost basis of such a callable debt security over the amount repayable by the issuer at
the earliest call date (i.e., the premium) must be amortized to the earliest call date (unless the institution
applies the guidance in ASC Subtopic 310-20 that allows estimates of future principal prepayments to be
considered in the effective yield calculation when the institution holds a large number of similar debt securities
for which prepayments are probable and the timing and amount of the prepayments can be reasonably
estimated). If the call option is not exercised at its earliest call date, the institution must reset the effective
yield using the payment terms of the debt security.
The ASU does not change the accounting for debt securities held at a discount. The discount on such debt
securities continues to be amortized to maturity (unless the Subtopic 310-20 guidance mentioned above is
applied).
For institutions that are public business entities, as defined under U.S. GAAP, the new standard is effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. For
institutions that are not public business entities (i.e., that are private companies), the new standard is effective
for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2020.
Early application of the new standard is permitted for all institutions, including adoption in an interim period of
2018 or a subsequent year before the applicable effective date for an institution. If an institution early adopts
the ASU in an interim period, the cumulative-effect adjustment shall be reflected as of the beginning of the
fiscal year of adoption.
An institution must apply the new standard on a modified retrospective basis as of the beginning of the period
of adoption. Under the modified retrospective method, an institution should apply a cumulative-effect
adjustment to affected accounts existing as of the beginning of the fiscal year the new standard is adopted.
The cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings for this change in accounting principle should be
reported in Call Report Schedule RI-A, item 2.
6

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

For additional information, institutions should refer to ASU 2017-08, which is available at
http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1176168934053&acceptedDisclaimer=true.
Recognition and Measurement of Financial Instruments: Investments in Equity Securities
In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and
Financial Liabilities.” This ASU makes targeted improvements to U.S. GAAP. As one of its main provisions,
the ASU requires investments in equity securities, except those accounted for under the equity method and
those that result in consolidation, to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net
income. Thus, the ASU eliminates the existing concept of AFS equity securities, which are measured at
fair value with changes in fair value generally recognized in other comprehensive income. To be classified
as AFS under current U.S. GAAP, an equity security must have a readily determinable fair value and not be
held for trading. In addition, for an equity security that does not have a readily determinable fair value, the
ASU permits an entity to elect to measure the security at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes
resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or a similar investment of the
same issuer. When this election is made for an equity security without a readily determinable fair value, the
ASU simplifies the impairment assessment of such an investment by requiring a qualitative assessment to
identify impairment.
The ASU’s measurement guidance for investments in equity securities also applies to other ownership
interests, such as interests in partnerships, unincorporated joint ventures, and limited liability companies.
However, the measurement guidance does not apply to Federal Home Loan Bank stock and Federal Reserve
Bank stock.
For institutions that are public business entities, as defined under U.S. GAAP, ASU 2016-01 is effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. For all
other entities, the ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods
within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. Early application of the ASU is permitted for all
institutions that are not public business entities as of the fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017,
including interim periods within those fiscal years. Institutions must apply ASU 2016-01 for Call Report
purposes in accordance with the effective dates set forth in the ASU.
With the elimination of AFS equity securities upon an institution’s adoption of ASU 2016-01, the amount of net
unrealized gains (losses) on these securities, net of tax effect, that is included in AOCI on the Call Report
balance sheet (Schedule RC, item 26.b) as of the adoption date will be reclassified (transferred) from AOCI
into the retained earnings component of equity capital on the balance sheet (Schedule RC, item 26.a).
Thereafter, changes in the fair value of (i.e., the unrealized gains and losses on) an institution’s equity
securities that would have been classified as AFS under existing U.S. GAAP will be recognized through net
income rather than other comprehensive income (OCI). For an institution’s holdings of equity securities
without readily determinable fair values as of the adoption date for which the measurement alternative is
elected, the measurement provisions of the ASU are to be applied prospectively to these securities.
For additional information, institutions should refer to ASU 2016-01, which is available at
http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1176167762170&acceptedDisclaimer=true.
Recognition and Measurement of Financial Instruments: Fair Value Option Liabilities
In addition to the changes in the accounting for equity securities discussed in the preceding section of these
Supplemental Instructions, ASU No. 2016-01 requires an institution to present separately in OCI the portion of
the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk
(“own credit risk”) when the institution has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the
fair value option for financial instruments. Until an institution adopts the own credit risk provisions of the ASU,
U.S. GAAP requires the institution to report the entire change in the fair value of a fair value option liability in
earnings. The ASU does not apply to other financial liabilities measured at fair value, including derivatives.
For these other financial liabilities, the effect of a change in an entity’s own credit risk will continue to be
reported in net income.

7

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

The change due to own credit risk, as described above, is the difference between the total change in fair value
and the amount resulting from a change in a base market rate (e.g., a risk-free interest rate). An institution
may use another method that it believes results in a faithful measurement of the fair value change attributable
to instrument-specific credit risk. However, it will have to apply the method consistently to each financial
liability from period to period.
The effective dates of ASU 2016-01 are described in the preceding section of these Supplemental Instructions.
Notwithstanding these effective dates, early application of the ASU’s provisions regarding the presentation in
OCI of changes due to own credit risk on fair value option liabilities is permitted for all entities for financial
statements of fiscal years or interim periods that have not yet been issued or made available for issuance, and
in the same period for Call Report purposes.
When an institution with a calendar year fiscal year adopts the own credit risk provisions of ASU 2016-01, the
accumulated gains and losses as of the beginning of the fiscal year due to changes in the instrument-specific
credit risk of fair value option liabilities, net of tax effect, are reclassified from Schedule RC, item 26.a,
“Retained earnings,” to Schedule RC, item 26.b, “Accumulated other comprehensive income.” If an institution
with a calendar year fiscal year chooses to early apply the ASU’s provisions for fair value option liabilities in an
interim period after the first interim period of its fiscal year, any unrealized gains and losses due to changes in
own credit risk and the related tax effects recognized in the Call Report income statement during the interim
period(s) before the interim period of adoption should be reclassified from earnings to OCI. In the Call Report,
this reclassification would be from Schedule RI, item 5.l, “Other noninterest income,” and Schedule RI, item 9,
“Applicable income taxes,” to Schedule RI-A, item 10, “Other comprehensive income,” with a corresponding
reclassification from Schedule RC, item 26.a, to Schedule RC, item 26.b.
Additionally, for purposes of reporting on Schedule RC-R, Part I, institutions should report in item 10.a, “Less:
Unrealized net gain (loss) related to changes in the fair value of liabilities that are due to changes in own credit
risk,” the amount included in AOCI attributable to changes in the fair value of fair value option liabilities that are
due to changes in the institution’s own credit risk. Institutions should note that this AOCI amount is included in
the amount reported in Schedule RC-R, Part I, item 3, “Accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI).”
For additional information, institutions should refer to ASU 2016-01, which is available at
http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1176167762170&acceptedDisclaimer=true.
New Revenue Recognition Accounting Standard
In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers,” which added
ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The core principle of Topic 606 is that an entity
should recognize revenue at an amount that reflects the consideration to which it expects to be entitled
in exchange for transferring goods or services to a customer as part of the entity’s ordinary activities.
ASU 2014-09 also added Topic 610, Other Income, to the ASC. Topic 610 applies to income recognition that
is not within the scope of Topic 606, other Topics (such as Topic 840 on leases), or other revenue or income
guidance. As discussed in the following section of these Supplemental Instructions, Topic 610 applies to an
institution’s sales of repossessed nonfinancial assets, such as other real estate owned (OREO). The sale of
repossessed nonfinancial assets is not considered an “ordinary activity” because institutions do not typically
invest in nonfinancial assets. ASU 2014-09 and subsequent amendments are collectively referred to herein
as the “new standard.”
The new standard specifically excludes financial instruments and other contractual rights or obligations within
the scope of Topic 310, Receivables; Topic 320, Investments – Debt Securities; Topic 321, Investments –
Equity Securities; Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging; and certain other ASC Topics. Therefore, many
common revenue streams in the financial sector, such as interest and dividend income, fair value adjustments,
gains and losses on sales of financial instruments, and loan origination fees, are not within the scope of the
new standard. The new standard may change the timing for the recognition of, and the presentation of, those
revenue streams within the scope of ASC Subtopic 606-10, such as certain fees associated with credit card
arrangements, underwriting fees and costs, and deposit-related fees.

8

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

For institutions that are public business entities, as defined under U.S. GAAP, the new standard is effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within those fiscal years.
For institutions that are not public business entities (i.e., that are private companies), the new standard is
effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim reporting periods within fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2019. Early application of the new standard is permitted. If an institution
chooses to early adopt the new standard for financial reporting purposes, the institution should implement the
new standard in its Call Report for the same quarter-end report date.
For Call Report purposes, an institution must apply the new standard on a modified retrospective basis as of
the effective date of the standard. Under the modified retrospective method, an institution should apply a
cumulative-effect adjustment to affected accounts existing as of the beginning of the fiscal year the new
standard is adopted. The cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings for this change in accounting
principle should be reported in Call Report Schedule RI-A, item 2. An institution that early adopts the new
standard must apply it in its entirety. The institution cannot choose to apply the guidance to some revenue
streams and not to others that are within the scope of the new standard.
For additional information, institutions should refer to the new standard, which is available at
http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Page/SectionPage&cid=1176156316498.
Revenue Recognition: Accounting for Sales of OREO
As stated in the preceding section, Topic 610 applies to an institution’s sale of repossessed nonfinancial
assets, such as OREO. When the new standard becomes effective at the dates discussed above, Topic 610
will eliminate the prescriptive criteria and methods for sale accounting and gain recognition for dispositions of
OREO currently set forth in Subtopic 360-20, Property, Plant, and Equipment – Real Estate Sales. Under the
new standard, an institution will recognize the entire gain or loss, if any, and derecognize the OREO at the
time of sale if the transaction meets certain requirements of Topic 606. Otherwise, an institution will generally
record any payments received as a deposit liability to the buyer and continue reporting the OREO as an asset
at the time of the transaction.
The following paragraphs highlight key aspects of Topic 610 that will apply to seller-financed sales of OREO
once the new standard takes effect. When implementing the new standard, an institution will need to exercise
judgment in determining whether a contract (within the meaning of Topic 606) exists for the sale or transfer of
OREO, whether the institution has performed its obligations identified in the contract, and what the transaction
price is for calculation of the amount of gain or loss. For additional information, please refer to the Glossary
entry for “Foreclosed Assets” in the Call Report instruction books, which was updated in March 2017 to
incorporate guidance on the application of the new standard to sales of OREO.
Under Topic 610, when an institution does not have a controlling financial interest in the OREO buyer under
Topic 810, Consolidation, the institution’s first step in assessing whether it can derecognize an OREO asset
and recognize revenue upon the sale or transfer of the OREO is to determine whether a contract exists under
the provisions of Topic 606. In order for a transaction to be a contract under Topic 606, it must meet five
criteria. Although all five criteria require careful analysis for seller-financed sales of OREO, two criteria in
particular may require significant judgment. These criteria are the commitment of the parties to the transaction
to perform their respective obligations and the collectability of the transaction price. To evaluate whether a
transaction meets the collectability criterion, a selling institution must determine whether it is probable that it
will collect substantially all of the consideration to which it is entitled in exchange for the transfer of the OREO,
i.e., the transaction price. To make this determination, as well as the determination that the buyer of the
OREO is committed to perform its obligations, a selling institution should consider all facts and circumstances
related to the buyer’s ability and intent to pay the transaction price. As with the current accounting standards
governing seller-financed sales of OREO, the amount and character of a buyer’s initial equity in the property
(typically the cash down payment) and recourse provisions remain important factors to evaluate. Other factors
to consider may include, but are not limited to, the financing terms of the loan (including amortization and any
balloon payment), the credit standing of the buyer, the cash flow from the property, and the selling institution’s
continuing involvement with the property following the transaction.
If the five contract criteria in Topic 606 have not been met, the institution generally may not derecognize the
OREO asset or recognize revenue (gain or loss) as an accounting sale has not occurred. In contrast, if an
9

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

institution determines the contract criteria in Topic 606 have been met, it must then determine whether it has
satisfied its performance obligations as identified in the contract by transferring control of the asset to the
buyer. For seller-financed sales of OREO, the transfer of control generally occurs on the closing date of the
sale when the institution obtains the right to receive payment for the property and transfers legal title to the
buyer. However, an institution must consider all relevant facts and circumstances to determine whether
control of the OREO has transferred.
When a contract exists and an institution has transferred control of the asset, the institution should
derecognize the OREO asset and recognize a gain or loss for the difference between the transaction price and
the carrying amount of the OREO asset. Generally, the transaction price in a sale of OREO will be the
contract amount in the purchase/sale agreement, including for a seller-financed sale at market terms.
However, the transaction price may differ from the amount stated in the contract due to the existence of offmarket terms on the financing. In this situation, to determine the transaction price, the contract amount should
be adjusted for the time value of money by using as the discount rate a market rate of interest considering the
credit characteristics of the buyer and the terms of the financing.
As stated in the preceding section on the new revenue recognition accounting standard, for Call Report
purposes, an institution must apply the new standard on a modified retrospective basis. To determine the
cumulative-effect adjustment for the change in accounting for seller-financed OREO sales, an institution
should measure the impact of applying Topic 610 to the outstanding seller-financed sales of OREO currently
accounted for under Subtopic 360-20 using the installment, cost recovery, reduced-profit, or deposit method
as of the beginning of the fiscal year the new standard is adopted. The cumulative-effect adjustment to
retained earnings for this change in accounting principle should be reported in Call Report Schedule RI-A,
item 2.
Accounting for Leases
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases,” which added ASC Topic 842, Leases. This
guidance, once effective, supersedes ASC Topic 840, Leases.
Topic 842 does not fundamentally change lessor accounting; however, it aligns terminology between lessee
and lessor accounting and brings key aspects of lessor accounting into alignment with the FASB’s new
revenue recognition guidance in Topic 606. As a result, the classification difference between direct financing
leases and sales-type leases for lessors moves from a risk-and-rewards principle to a transfer of control
principle. Additionally, there is no longer a distinction in the treatment of real estate and non-real estate leases
by lessors.
The most significant change that Topic 842 makes is to lessee accounting. Under existing accounting
standards, lessees recognize lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet for capital leases, but do
not recognize operating leases on the balance sheet. The lessee accounting model under Topic 842 retains
the distinction between operating leases and capital leases, which the new standard labels finance leases.
However, the new standard requires lessees to record a right-of-use (ROU) asset and a lease liability on the
balance sheet for operating leases. (For finance leases, a lessee’s lease asset also is designated an ROU
asset.) In general, the new standard permits a lessee to make an accounting policy election to exempt leases
with a term of one year or less at their commencement date from on-balance sheet recognition. The lease
term generally includes the noncancellable period of a lease as well as purchase options and renewal options
reasonably certain to be exercised by the lessee, renewal options controlled by the lessor, and any other
economic incentive for the lessee to extend the lease. An economic incentive may include a related-party
commitment. When preparing to implement Topic 842, lessees will need to analyze their existing lease
contracts to determine the entries to record on adoption of this new standard.
For a sale-leaseback transaction to qualify for sales treatment, Topic 842 requires certain criteria within
Topic 606 to be met. Topic 606 focuses on the transfer of control of the leased asset from the seller/lessee to
the buyer/lessor. A sale-leaseback transaction that does not transfer control is accounted for as a financing
arrangement. For a transaction currently accounted for as a sale-leaseback under existing U.S. GAAP, an
entity is not required to reassess whether the transaction would have qualified as a sale and a leaseback
under Topic 842 when it adopts the new standard.

10

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

Leases classified as leveraged leases prior to the adoption of Topic 842 may continue to be accounted for
under Topic 840 unless subsequently modified. Topic 842 eliminates leveraged lease accounting for leases
that commence after an institution adopts the new accounting standard.
For institutions that are public business entities, as defined under U.S. GAAP, ASU 2016-02 is effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim reporting periods within those fiscal years.
For institutions that are not public business entities, the new standard is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2019, and interim reporting periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020.
Early application of the new standard is permitted for all institutions. An institution that early adopts the new
standard must apply it in its entirety to all lease-related transactions. If an institution chooses to early adopt
the new standard for financial reporting purposes, the institution should implement the new standard in its
Call Report for the same quarter-end report date.
For Call Report purposes, an institution must apply the new standard on a modified retrospective basis. Under
the modified retrospective method, an institution should apply a cumulative-effect adjustment to affected
accounts existing as of the beginning of the fiscal year the new standard is adopted. The cumulative-effect
adjustment to retained earnings for this change in accounting principle should be reported in Schedule RI-A,
item 2. The ROU asset recorded upon adoption should be reflected in Schedule RC, item 6, “Premises and
fixed assets” and the related lease liability recorded upon adoption should be reflected in Schedule RC-M,
item 5.b, “Other borrowings.” These classifications are consistent with the current Call Report instructions for
reporting a lessee’s capital leases. The agencies do not plan to add any new items to the Call Report for
reporting leases under the new lease accounting standard.
The agencies have received questions regarding how lessee institutions should treat ROU assets under the
agencies’ regulatory capital rules (12 CFR Part 3 (OCC); 12 CFR Part 217 (Board); and 12 CFR Part 324
(FDIC)). Those rules require that most intangible assets be deducted from regulatory capital. However, some
institutions are uncertain whether ROU assets are intangible assets. The agencies are clarifying that, to the
extent an ROU asset arises due to a lease of a tangible asset (e.g., building or equipment), the ROU asset
should be treated as a tangible asset not subject to deduction from regulatory capital. An ROU asset not
subject to deduction must be risk weighted at 100 percent under Section 32(l)(5) of the agencies’ regulatory
capital rules and included in a lessee institution’s calculations of total risk-weighted assets. In addition, such
an asset must be included in a lessee institution’s total assets for leverage capital purposes. The agencies
believe this treatment is consistent with the current treatment of capital leases under the rules, whereby a
lessee’s lease assets under capital leases of tangible assets are treated as tangible assets, receive a 100
percent risk weight, and are included in the leverage ratio denominator. This treatment is also consistent with
the approach taken by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision
(https://www.bis.org/press/p170406a.htm).
For additional information on ASU 2016-02, institutions should refer to the FASB’s website at:
http://www.fasb.org/cs/ContentServer?c=FASBContent_C&pagename=FASB%2FFASBContent_C%2FCompl
etedProjectPage&cid=1176167904031, which includes a link to the new accounting standard.
Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments Related to a Business Combination
In September 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-16, “Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period
Adjustments.” Under ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations (formerly FASB Statement No. 141(R),
“Business Combinations”), if the initial accounting for a business combination is incomplete by the end of the
reporting period in which the combination occurs, the acquirer reports provisional amounts in its financial
statements for the items for which the accounting is incomplete. During the measurement period, the acquirer
is required to adjust the provisional amounts recognized at the acquisition date, with a corresponding
adjustment to goodwill, to reflect new information obtained about facts and circumstances that existed as of
the acquisition date that, if known, would have affected the measurement of the amounts recognized as of that
date. At present under Topic 805, an acquirer is required to retrospectively adjust the provisional amounts
recognized at the acquisition date to reflect the new information. To simplify the accounting for the
adjustments made to provisional amounts, ASU 2015-16 eliminates the requirement to retrospectively account
for the adjustments. Accordingly, the ASU amends Topic 805 to require an acquirer to recognize adjustments
to provisional amounts that are identified during the measurement period in the reporting period in which
adjustment amounts are determined. Under the ASU, the acquirer also must recognize in the financial
11

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

statements for the same reporting period the effect on earnings, if any, resulting from the adjustments to the
provisional amounts as if the accounting for the business combination had been completed as of the
acquisition date.
In general, the measurement period in a business combination is the period after the acquisition date during
which the acquirer may adjust provisional amounts reported for identifiable assets acquired, liabilities
assumed, and consideration transferred for the acquiree for which the initial accounting for the business
combination is incomplete at the end of the reporting period in which the combination occurs. Topic 805
provides additional guidance on the measurement period, which shall not exceed one year from the acquisition
date, and adjustments to provisional amounts during this period.
The ASU’s amendments to Topic 805 should be applied prospectively to adjustments to provisional amounts
that occur after the effective date of the ASU. For institutions that are public business entities, as defined
under U.S. GAAP, ASU 2015-16 is currently in effect. For institutions that are not public business entities
(i.e., that are private companies), the ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, and
interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017. Thus, institutions with a calendar year
fiscal year that are private companies must apply the ASU to any adjustments to provisional amounts that
occur after January 1, 2017, beginning with their Call Reports for December 31, 2017. Early application of
ASU 2015-16 is permitted in Call Reports that have not been submitted.
For additional information, institutions should refer to ASU 2015-16, which is available at
http://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1176166411212&acceptedDisclaimer=true.
Amending Previously Submitted Report Data
Should your institution find that it needs to revise previously submitted Call Report data, please make the
appropriate changes to the data, ensure that the revised data passes the FFIEC-published validation criteria,
and submit the revised data file to the CDR using one of the two methods described in the banking agencies'
FIL for the June 30, 2018, report date. For technical assistance with the submission of amendments to the
CDR, please contact the CDR Help Desk by telephone at (888) CDR-3111, by fax at (703) 774-3946, or by
e-mail at [email protected].
Other Reporting Matters
For the following topics, institutions should continue to follow the guidance in the specified Call Report
Supplemental Instructions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

“Purchased” Loans Originated By Others – Supplemental Instructions for September 30, 2015
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_FFIEC041_suppinst_201509.pdf)
True-up Liability under an FDIC Loss-Sharing Agreement – Supplemental Instructions for June 30, 2015
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_FFIEC041_suppinst_201506.pdf)
Troubled Debt Restructurings, Current Market Interest Rates, and ASU No. 2011-02 – Supplemental
Instructions for December 31, 2014
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_FFIEC041_suppinst_201412.pdf)
Determining the Fair Value of Derivatives – Supplemental Instructions for June 30, 2014
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_FFIEC041_suppinst_201406.pdf)
Indemnification Assets and ASU No. 2012-06 – Supplemental Instructions for June 30, 2014
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_FFIEC041_suppinst_201406.pdf)
Other-Than-Temporary Impairment of Debt Securities – Supplemental Instructions for June 30, 2014
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_FFIEC041_suppinst_201406.pdf)
Small Business Lending Fund – Supplemental Instructions for March 31, 2013
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_FFIEC041_suppinst_201303.pdf)
Reporting Purchased Subordinated Securities in Schedule RC-S – Supplemental Instructions for
September 30, 2011
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_FFIEC041_suppinst_201109.pdf)
Treasury Department’s Capital Purchase Program – Supplemental Instructions for September 30, 2011
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_FFIEC041_suppinst_201109.pdf)
12

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

•
•
•

Deposit insurance assessments – Supplemental Instructions for September 30, 2009
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_041_suppinst_200909.pdf)
Accounting for share-based payments under FASB Statement No. 123 (Revised 2004), Share-Based
Payment – Supplemental Instructions for December 31, 2006
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_041_suppinst_200612.pdf)
Commitments to originate and sell mortgage loans – Supplemental Instructions for March 31, 2006
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_041_suppinst_200603.pdf) and June 30, 2005
(https://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/FFIEC_forms/FFIEC031_041_suppinst_200506.pdf)

Call Report Software Vendors
For information on available Call Report preparation software products, institutions should contact:
Axiom Software Laboratories, Inc.
67 Wall Street, 17th Floor
New York, New York 10005
Telephone: (212) 248-4188
http://www.axiomsl.com

DBI Financial Systems, Inc.
P.O. Box 14027
Bradenton, Florida 34280
Telephone: (800) 774-3279
http://www.e-dbi.com

Fed Reporter, Inc.
28118 Agoura Road, Suite 202
Agoura Hills, California 91301
Telephone: (888) 972-3772
http://www.fedreporter.net

FIS Compliance Solutions
16855 West Bernardo Drive,
Suite 270
San Diego, California 92127
Telephone: (800) 825-3772
http://www.callreporter.com

FiServ, Inc.
1345 Old Cheney Road
Lincoln, Nebraska 68512
Telephone: (402) 423-2682
http://www.premier.fiserv.com

KPMG LLP
303 Peachtree Street, Suite 2000
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
Telephone: (404) 221-2355
https://advisory.kpmg.us/riskconsulting/frm/capitalmanagement.html

Lombard Risk
One Gateway Center,
26th Floor
Newark, New Jersey 07102
Telephone: (973) 648-0900
http://www.lombardrisk.com

SHAZAM Core Services
6700 Pioneer Parkway
Johnston, Iowa 50131
Telephone: (888) 262-3348
http://www.cardinal400.com

Wolters Kluwer Financial Services
130 Turner Street, Building 3,
4th Floor
Waltham, Massachusetts 02453
Telephone (800) 261-3111
http://www.wolterskluwer.com

13

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

APPENDIX

Section 214 of EGRRCPA, which includes the definition of “HVCRE ADC Loan,” is as follows:
SEC. 214. PROMOTING CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT ON MAIN STREET.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:
‘‘SEC. 51. CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN ACQUISITION, DEVELOPMENT, OR
CONSTRUCTION LOANS.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The appropriate Federal banking agencies may only require a depository institution to
assign a heightened risk weight to a high volatility commercial real estate (HVCRE) exposure (as such term is
defined under section 324.2 of title 12, Code of Federal Regulations, as of October 11, 2017, or if a successor
regulation is in effect as of the date of the enactment of this section, such term or any successor term
contained in such successor regulation) under any risk-based capital requirement if such exposure is an
HVCRE ADC loan.
‘‘(b) HVCRE ADC LOAN DEFINED.—For purposes of this section and with respect to a depository
institution, the term ‘HVCRE ADC loan’—
‘‘(1) means a credit facility secured by land or improved real property that, prior to being reclassified by
the depository institution as a non-HVCRE ADC loan pursuant to subsection (d)—
‘‘(A) primarily finances, has financed, or refinances the acquisition, development, or construction
of real property;
‘‘(B) has the purpose of providing financing to acquire, develop, or improve such real property into
income-producing real property; and
‘‘(C) is dependent upon future income or sales proceeds from, or refinancing of, such real property
for the repayment of such credit facility;
‘‘(2) does not include a credit facility financing—
‘‘(A) the acquisition, development, or construction of properties that are—
‘‘(i) one- to four-family residential properties;
‘‘(ii) real property that would qualify as an investment in community development; or
‘‘(iii) agricultural land;
‘‘(B) the acquisition or refinance of existing income-producing real property secured by a mortgage
on such property, if the cash flow being generated by the real property is sufficient to support the debt
service and expenses of the real property, in accordance with the institution’s applicable loan
underwriting criteria for permanent financings;
‘‘(C) improvements to existing income-producing improved real property secured by a mortgage
on such property, if the cash flow being generated by the real property is sufficient to support the debt
service and expenses of the real property, in accordance with the institution’s applicable loan
underwriting criteria for permanent financings; or
‘‘(D) commercial real property projects in which—
‘‘(i) the loan-to-value ratio is less than or equal to the applicable maximum supervisory loan-tovalue ratio as determined by the appropriate Federal banking agency;
‘‘(ii) the borrower has contributed capital of at least 15 percent of the real property’s appraised,
‘as completed’ value to the project in the form of—
‘‘(I) cash;
‘‘(II) unencumbered readily marketable assets;
‘‘(III) paid development expenses out-of-pocket; or
‘‘(IV) contributed real property or improvements; and
‘‘(iii) the borrower contributed the minimum amount of capital described under clause (ii)
before the depository institution advances funds (other than the advance of a nominal sum made
in order to secure the depository institution’s lien against the real property) under the credit facility,
and such minimum amount of capital contributed by the borrower is contractually required to

14

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

remain in the project until the credit facility has been reclassified by the depository institution as a
non-HVCRE ADC loan under subsection (d);
‘‘(3) does not include any loan made prior to January 1, 2015; and
‘‘(4) does not include a credit facility reclassified as a non-HVCRE ADC loan under subsection (d).
‘‘(c) VALUE OF CONTRIBUTED REAL PROPERTY.—For purposes of this section, the value of any real
property contributed by a borrower as a capital contribution shall be the appraised value of the property as
determined under standards prescribed pursuant to section 1110 of the Financial Institutions Reform,
Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (12 U.S.C. 3339), in connection with the extension of the credit facility
or loan to such borrower.
‘‘(d) RECLASSIFICATION AS A NON-HVRCE ADC LOAN.—For purposes of this section and with respect
to a credit facility and a depository institution, upon—
‘‘(1) the substantial completion of the development or construction of the real property being financed
by the credit facility; and
‘‘(2) cash flow being generated by the real property being sufficient to support the debt service and
expenses of the real property, in accordance with the institution’s applicable loan underwriting criteria for
permanent financings, the credit facility may be reclassified by the depository institution as a Non-HVCRE
ADC loan.
‘‘(e) EXISTING AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall limit the supervisory, regulatory, or
enforcement authority of an appropriate Federal banking agency to further the safe and sound operation of an
institution under the supervision of the appropriate Federal banking agency.’’.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Section 202 of EGRRCPA, which creates a limited exception for certain reciprocal deposits, is as follows:
SEC. 202. LIMITED EXCEPTION FOR RECIPROCAL DEPOSITS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 29 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1831f) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
‘‘(i) LIMITED EXCEPTION FOR RECIPROCAL DEPOSITS.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Reciprocal deposits of an agent institution shall not be considered to be funds
obtained, directly or indirectly, by or through a deposit broker to the extent that the total amount of such
reciprocal deposits does not exceed the lesser of—
‘‘(A) $5,000,000,000; or
‘‘(B) an amount equal to 20 percent of the total liabilities of the agent institution.
‘‘(2) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection:
‘‘(A) AGENT INSTITUTION.—The term ‘agent institution’ means an insured depository institution
that places a covered deposit through a deposit placement network at other insured depository
institutions in amounts that are less than or equal to the standard maximum deposit insurance amount,
specifying the interest rate to be paid for such amounts, if the insured depository institution—
‘‘(i)(I) when most recently examined under section 10(d) was found to have a composite
condition of outstanding or good; and
‘‘(II) is well capitalized;
‘‘(ii) has obtained a waiver pursuant to subsection (c); or
‘‘(iii) does not receive an amount of reciprocal deposits that causes the total amount of
reciprocal deposits held by the agent institution to be greater than the average of the total amount
of reciprocal deposits held by the agent institution on the last day of each of the 4 calendar
quarters preceding the calendar quarter in which the agent institution was found not to have a
composite condition of outstanding or good or was determined to be not well capitalized.
‘‘(B) COVERED DEPOSIT.—The term ‘covered deposit’ means a deposit that—
‘‘(i) is submitted for placement through a deposit placement network by an agent institution;
and

15

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS – JUNE 2018

‘‘(ii) does not consist of funds that were obtained for the agent institution, directly or indirectly,
by or through a deposit broker before submission for placement through a deposit placement
network.
‘‘(C) DEPOSIT PLACEMENT NETWORK.—The term ‘deposit placement network’ means a
network in which an insured depository institution participates, together with other insured depository
institutions, for the processing and receipt of reciprocal deposits.
‘‘(D) NETWORK MEMBER BANK.—The term ‘network member bank’ means an insured
depository institution that is a member of a deposit placement network.
‘‘(E) RECIPROCAL DEPOSITS.—The term ‘reciprocal deposits’ means deposits received by an
agent institution through a deposit placement network with the same maturity (if any) and in the same
aggregate amount as covered deposits placed by the agent institution in other network member
banks.
‘‘(F) WELL CAPITALIZED.—The term ‘well capitalized’ has the meaning given the term in section
38(b)(1).’’.
(b) INTEREST RATE RESTRICTION.—Section 29 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1831f)
is amended by striking subsection (e) and inserting the following:
‘‘(e) RESTRICTION ON INTEREST RATE PAID.—
‘‘(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection—
‘‘(A) the terms ‘agent institution’, ‘reciprocal deposits’, and ‘well capitalized’ have the meanings
given those terms in subsection (i); and
‘‘(B) the term ‘covered insured depository institution’ means an insured depository institution that—
‘‘(i) under subsection (c) or (d), accepts funds obtained, directly or indirectly, by or through a
deposit broker; or
‘‘(ii) while acting as an agent institution under subsection (i), accepts reciprocal deposits while
not well capitalized.
‘‘(2) PROHIBITION.—A covered insured depository institution may not pay a rate of interest on funds
or reciprocal deposits described in paragraph (1) that, at the time that the funds or reciprocal deposits are
accepted, significantly exceeds the limit set forth in paragraph (3).
‘‘(3) LIMIT ON INTEREST RATES.—The limit on the rate of interest referred to in paragraph (2) shall
be—
‘‘(A) the rate paid on deposits of similar maturity in the normal market area of the covered insured
depository institution for deposits accepted in the normal market area of the covered insured
depository institution; or
‘‘(B) the national rate paid on deposits of comparable maturity, as established by the Corporation,
for deposits accepted outside the normal market area of the covered insured depository institution.’’.

16