XML 33 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.3.1.900
REGULATORY MATTERS AND SETTLEMENT OF OTS ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
3 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2015
REGULATORY MATTERS AND SETTLEMENT OF OTS ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS [Abstract]  
REGULATORY MATTERS AND SETTLEMENT OF OTS ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
NOTE 13.REGULATORY MATTERS AND SETTLEMENT OF OTS ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

On July 21, 2011, pursuant to the Dodd Frank Act, the OTS was integrated into the OCC and the functions of the OTS related to thrift holding companies were transferred to the Federal Reserve.  The OCC, as the Bank’s primary federal regulator, is responsible for the ongoing examination, supervision and regulation of the Bank.  The Dodd Frank Act maintains the existence of the federal savings association charter and the HOLA, the primary statute governing federal savings banks.  The Federal Reserve is responsible for the ongoing examination, supervision and regulation of the Company.  A consent order that had been in effect was terminated on May 21, 2015 by the Federal Reserve.  Prior to passage of the Dodd-Frank Act, the OTS had issued supervisory directives to the Bank, consent orders to the Bank and the Company, and had taken other regulatory action to require the Bank to reimburse certain consumers in connection with a credit program that was discontinued.  All supervisory directives have been terminated, and on August 7, 2014, the OCC terminated the Bank’s Consent Order.
 
On January 5, 2015, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) published industry guidance in the form of Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQs”) with respect to the categorization of deposit liabilities as "brokered" deposits. On November 13, 2015, the FDIC issued for comment updated and annotated FAQs.

Due to the Bank’s status as a "well-capitalized" institution under the FDIC's prompt corrective action regulations, and further with respect to the Bank’s financial condition in general, the Company does not at this time anticipate that the Guidance will have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business operations or its ability to further grow deposits.  However, should the Bank ever fail to be well-capitalized in the future, as a result of failing to meet the well-capitalized requirements, or the imposition of an individual minimum capital requirement or similar formal requirements, then, notwithstanding that the Bank has capital in excess of the well-capitalized minimum requirements, the Bank would be prohibited, absent waiver from the FDIC, from utilizing brokered deposits (i.e., may not accept, renew or rollover brokered deposits) which could produce serious adverse effects on the Company’s liquidity, and financial condition and results of operations.  Recently, the FDIC proposed a rule which would change the method of calculating the assessment fees for FDIC – insured institutions. The Bank is currently assessing the impact of the proposed assessment rule.