InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
OFAC Updates: New Sanction Designations and Additions to Specially Designated Nationals List
In May, OFAC announced implementation of sanctions against several entities and individuals designated for, among others, materially assisting, sponsoring, or providing financial support to certain foreign entities. In addition, OFAC updated its list of Specially Designated Nationals.
Pakistan-Based ISIS Financial Facilitators. On May 11, OFAC imposed sanctions against three Pakistani individuals and one entity for their roles in assisting ISIS’s financial networks and their “connections with terrorist groups that are a direct threat to the security of both the [U.S.] and Pakistan.” The designations block the individuals and entity—each of whom has been designated as providing the identified networks with material and financial support—from participating in the global financial system, and further state that “all property and interests in property . . . subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with” those listed.
Syrian Government Supporters. On May 16, OFAC announced it was taking action against five individuals and five entities in response to the Syrian Government’s continued acts of violence committed against its own citizens. The sanctions came as a reaction to three Executive Orders: (i) E.O. 13572—targeting persons responsible for human rights abuses in Syria, their supporters, and supporters of senior officials or certain activities related to public corruption; (ii) E.O. 13582—targeting the Government of Syria and its supporters; and (iii) E.O. 13382—targeting proliferators of weapons of mass destruction and their supporters. The new sanctions prohibit transactions by U.S. persons with those listed and “any property or interest in property of the identified persons in the possession or control of U.S. persons or within the United States must be blocked.”
Yemen-Based Financial Facilitators and Arms Trafficker. On May 19, OFAC imposed sanctions against two Yemen-based financial facilitators for their roles in assisting al-Qa’ida leaders in the Arabian Peninsula. The designations block the individuals, both of whom were designated as engaging in actions through weapon trafficking, from the global financial system, and further state that “all property and interests in property . . . subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with” the identified individuals.
Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Sanctions. On May 19, OFAC made additions to the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list, which designates individuals and companies who are prohibited from dealing with the U.S. and whose assets are blocked. Transactions are prohibited if they involve transferring, paying, exporting, or otherwise dealing in the property or interest in property of an entity or individual on the SDN list. Additions to the list were made under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Sanctions Regulations against two two Peruvian individuals and three Peruvian entities.
President Issues Executive Order Directing Agencies to Focus on Cybersecurity
On May 11, the Trump Administration issued an Executive Order, directing federal agencies to increase their efforts to mitigate cyber risks. The order, entitled “Strengthening the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks and Critical Infrastructure,” mandates that agencies follow the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity to manage cybersecurity risk. Among other things, the EO tasks agency heads with submitting a risk management report to the Department of Homeland Security and the OMB within 90 days. In addition, the order also directs defense agencies, the office of the Attorney General and the FBI, to provide the White House with recommendations on how to improve cybersecurity standards among critical infrastructure industries. Notably, the EO includes the financial services industry in its list of critical infrastructure industries. The report is due in 180 days.
American Bankers Association White Paper Addresses Concerns Over HMDA Expansion
On May 2, the American Bankers Association (ABA) issued a white paper to the Treasury Department on the implementation of the 2015 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) rule as part of its continuing response to President Trump’s executive order outlining “core principles” for financial regulation (see previously issued Special Alert here). The white paper, HMDA – More Really is Less: The Data Fog Frustrates HMDA, presents several views held by the ABA including that the CFPB should (i) rescind requirements to collect any data fields not expressly required by HMDA; (ii) suspend the effective date of the 2015 HMDA rule until privacy and security concerns are addressed (see previously issued Special Alert here); (iii) exclude commercial loans from HMDA coverage; and (iv) revoke the new HMDA data elements added by the Dodd-Frank Act. The ABA noted that the Dodd-Frank Act added more than 13 new categories to the statutory HMDA data fields lenders are required to collect, and in the implementing regulation, Regulation C, the CFPB added 25 new data fields to the existing 23 fields. The ABA noted that the CFPB estimates that, in addition to existing costs of HMDA compliance, the additional annual costs of operations will be approximately $120.6 million conservatively (more if reporting quarterly) and lenders will incur a one-time additional cost of between $177 million and $326.6 million. Furthermore, the ABA states there still remains a need to address the “significant” privacy issues presented by the “vast trove of data points added by Dodd-Frank,” and that “the collection and transfer and warehousing of greatly increased and more sensitive data will necessitate even more robust and costlier private sector and government systems.” However, the ABA noted the Bureau has not initiated rulemaking to address the privacy issues presented.
Notably, last month, the CFPB issued a proposal in the Federal Register to amend the 2015 HMDA rule (see previously issued Special Alert here). The changes are primarily for the purpose of clarifying data collection and reporting requirements, and most of the clarifications and revisions would take effect in January 2018. The deadline to submit comments on the CFPB’s proposal is May 25, 2017.
Treasury Announces FSOC Executive Session on May 8
Earlier this week, the Treasury Department announced that on Monday, May 8, Secretary Mnuchin will preside over an executive session of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC). According to a Treasury Department press release, the preliminary agenda includes:
- a discussion of the April 21 Presidential Memorandum on Council designations;
- an update on the annual reevaluation of the designation of a nonbank financial company;
- a discussion of interagency regulatory collaboration and the Feb. 3 Executive Order on core principles for financial regulation;
- a discussion of the FSOC’s 2017 Annual Report; and
- an update on bank holding companies’ living wills and resolution planning.
Consistent with FSOC’s transparency policy, the meeting may be made available via live webcast and/or can be viewed after it occurs. Meeting minutes for the most recent Council meeting are generally approved at the next Council meeting and posted online soon afterwards.
Meeting minutes for past Council meetings are available here.
Readouts for past Council meetings are available here.
Executive Order Calls for Agency Reorganization Plan
On March 13, the Trump Administration issued an Executive Order calling for a reorganization of the executive branch to improve its efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability. Specifically, the order, entitled “Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch,” mandates that Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) Director Mick Mulvaney “propose a plan to reorganize governmental functions and eliminate unnecessary agencies (as defined in section 551(1) of title 5, United States Code), components of agencies, and agency programs.” In order to assist Director Mulvaney in this task, the head of each agency is required to—within 180 days—submit to the OMB director a proposed plan “to reorganize the agency, if appropriate, in order to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of that agency.”
Notably, the order requires that the OMB Director seek public comment as to potential improvements in “the organization and functioning of the executive branch,” and requires that the OMB Director consider the comments received when formulating a proposed plan that must be submitted to the President 180 days after the deadline for agency submissions. The order also asks agencies to (as consistent with applicable law) consult with persons or entities outside of government with relevant expertise in organizational structure and management.
White House Calls for “Regulatory Reform Task Forces”; OMB Sends Guidance Memorandum to Heads of Departments and Agencies
On February 24, President Trump signed an Executive Order directing the “head of each agency” to establish a “Regulatory Reform Task Force,” led by a designated “Regulatory Reform Officer,” who is responsible for reviewing existing regulations and making “recommendations to the agency head regarding their repeal, replacement, or modification.” Specifically, the Regulatory Reform Task Forces are charged with identifying regulations that: (i) “eliminate jobs, or inhibit job creation”; (ii) are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective; (iii) “impose costs that exceed benefits”; (iv) create a “serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with regulatory reform initiatives and policies”; (v) are inconsistent with OMB’s “Information Quality Guidelines”; or (vi) implement Executive Orders or Presidential directives that have been repealed or substantially modified.
Among other things, the Order instructs the OMB Director to issue guidance outlining requirements for the incorporation of regulatory reform “performance indicators” into agencies’ annual performance plans and potentially “address[ing] how agencies not otherwise covered under this subsection should be held accountable for compliance with this order. The Order requires that the task forces solicit input from “entities significantly affected by Federal regulations, including state, local, and tribal governments, small businesses, consumers, non-governmental organizations, and trade associations,” and submit a report to the agency head within 90 days.
Thereafter, on February 28, recently-confirmed Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Mick Mulvaney released a memorandum and attachment for the heads of all offices in the Executive Office of the President (EOP) and Executive agencies, which summarizes the major elements of the legislative clearance function that the OMB, working with other offices, carries out on behalf of the President. The memorandum (OMB Circular No. A-19) details the requirements and procedures for legislative coordination and clearance, while the attachment summarizes the major elements and the essential purposes of the clearance process.
Among other things, the memorandum recommends that, in supporting the “President’s Program,” agencies within the Administration should: (i) submit to Congress legislative proposals needed to carry out the President’s Program; (ii) convey the Administration’s views on legislation that Congress has under consideration; and (iii) recommend approval or disapproval of bills passed by Congress. According to the memorandum, the primary goals of the clearance process are twofold: (i) to ensure that an agencies’ legislative communications with Congress are consistent with the President’s policies and objectives; and (ii) to allow for the Administration to “speak[] with one voice” regarding legislation.
White House Issues Interim Guidance Concerning its "2-for-1" Regulatory Order
On February 2, the OMB Acting Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) released a memorandum providing interim guidance for implementing President Trump’s January 30 Executive Order entitled “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs.” Among other things, the memorandum clarifies that the January 30 Order—which was covered previously by InfoBytes here—(i) does not apply to agencies defined as an “independent regulatory agency” by 44 U.S.C. § 3502(5), which include the CFPB; (ii) applies only to significant regulatory actions that have an annual effect on the economy of at least $100 million or result in other material effects as defined in Executive Order 12,866; and (iii) applies only to significant regulatory actions issued between noon on January 20 and September 30, 2017.
Groups Seek Injunction Blocking Trump's "2-For-1" Regulatory Order
On February 8, three organizations—Public Citizen, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Communications Workers of America—sued the Trump administration over the President’s recent Executive Order (as clarified by the OMB’s interim guidance issued on February 2), which directs agencies to identify two regulations for repeal for every rule written (covered in InfoBytes here). The action seeks to have the Executive Order declared unconstitutional and enforcement thereby stayed. Among other things, the complaint asserts that the President’s Executive Order unlawfully forces agencies to make decisions based on an “impermissible and arbitrary choice—whether to issue a new standard at the cost of the loss of benefits of two existing standards.” To repeal “two regulations for the purpose of adopting one new one, based solely on a directive to impose zero net costs and without any consideration of benefits,” Plaintiffs argue, “is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law.” The case has been assigned to Judge Gladys Kessler of the U.S. District Court for D.C.
President Issues Executive Order to Study the DOL's Fiduciary Rule
On February 3, President Trump issued an Executive Memorandum directing the Department of Labor (DOL) to examine the Fiduciary Rule—an April 2016 DOL rule that expands the circumstances in which a person will be treated as a fiduciary under both ERISA and Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code by reason of providing investment advice to retirement plans and IRAs. In the memorandum, President Trump calls for an examination of the Fiduciary Rule to determine whether it (i) has harmed or is likely to harm investors; (ii) has resulted in dislocations or disruptions within the retirement services industry; and (iii) is likely to cause an increase in litigation and an increase in the prices that investors and retirees must pay to gain access to retirement services. If the Secretary of Labor makes any of these findings, the memorandum directs the Secretary of Labor to publish a proposed rule rescinding or revising the Fiduciary Rule. Initial compliance with the Fiduciary Rule is currently required by April 10, but the DOL has announced that it “will now consider its legal options to delay the applicability date as we comply with the President’s memorandum.”
Special Alert: President Signs Executive Order Calling For Review of Financial Regulations
On February 3, President Trump signed an executive order (the Executive Order) directing the Treasury Secretary and the heads of the member agencies of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) to review financial laws and regulations—including the Dodd-Frank Act and regulations implementing that law—thereby setting into motion a process by which the 2010 financial law could be significantly scaled back.
Under the Executive Order, the Secretary of the Treasury – who has yet to be confirmed – has 120 days to review and report to the President which existing laws, treaties, regulations, guidance, reporting and recordkeeping requirements promote the “core principles” listed below and those that do not. The core principles include:
- restoring public accountability within Federal financial regulatory agencies and rationalize the Federal financial regulatory framework
- fostering economic growth and vibrant financial markets through more rigorous regulatory impact analysis that addresses systemic risk and market failures, such as moral hazard and information asymmetry
- enabling American companies to be competitive with foreign firms in domestic and foreign markets
- advancing American interests in international financial regulatory negotiations and meetings
- preventing taxpayer-funded bailouts, and
- empowering Americans to make independent financial decisions and informed choices in the marketplace, save for retirement, and build individual wealth
Click here to read full special alert
* * *
If you have questions about the order or other related issues, visit our Consumer Financial Protection Bureau practice for more information, or contact a BuckleySandler attorney with whom you have worked in the past.