Home > About
FDIC > Financial Reports >2008
Annual Report Highlights
2008 Annual Report Highlights
I. Management's Discussion and Analysis
The Year in Review
The year 2008 proved to be an extremely busy time for the FDIC. In addition to the normal course of business, the Corporation had a major role in creating and implementing government initiatives associated with the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP) and the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Also, additional resources were needed in response to the increased workload resulting from resolving numerous bank failures. The FDIC continued its work on high-profile policy issues and published numerous Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRs) throughout the year, seeking comment from the public. The Corporation also continued to focus on a strong supervisory program. The FDIC continued expansion of financial education programs with the creation of Money Smart for young adults. The FDIC also sponsored and co-sponsored major conferences and participated in local and global outreach initiatives.
Highlighted in this section are the Corporation’s 2008 accomplishments in each of its three major business lines – Insurance, Supervision and Consumer Protection, and Receivership Management – as well as its program support areas.
The FDIC insures bank and savings association deposits. As insurer, the FDIC must continually evaluate and effectively manage how changes in the economy, the financial markets and the banking system affect the adequacy and the viability of the Deposit Insurance Fund.
Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program
After issuing an interim final rule on October 23, 2008, the FDIC received more than 700 comments. Based on those comments, the FDIC made several significant changes to the final rule, which the FDIC adopted on November 21, 2008.
The final rule provided that, under the debt guarantee program, the FDIC will guarantee in full, through maturity or June 30, 2012, whichever comes earlier, senior unsecured debt issued by a participating entity between October 14, 2008, and June 30, 2009, up to a maximum of 125 percent of the par value of the entity’s senior unsecured debt that was outstanding as of the close of business September 30, 2008, and that was scheduled to mature on or before June 30, 2009. Banks, thrifts, bank holding companies, and certain thrift holding companies were eligible to participate. In a change from the original terms of the debt guarantee program, the final rule excluded, effective December 5, 2008, all debt with a term of 30 days or less from the definition of senior unsecured debt.
The final rule also provided that, under the transaction account program, the FDIC will guarantee in full all domestic noninterest-bearing transaction deposit accounts held at participating banks and thrifts through December 31, 2009, regardless of dollar amount. The guarantee also covers negotiable order of withdrawal accounts (NOW accounts) at participating institutions — provided the institution commits to maintaining interest rates on the account at no more than 0.50 percent — and Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts (IOLTAs) and functional equivalents.
The final rule required all institutions to elect whether or not to participate in one or both of the two components of the TLGP by December 5, 2008. As of December 31, 2008, approximately 56 percent of all eligible entities had opted in to the Debt Guarantee Program. Approximately 87 percent of FDIC-insured institutions opted in to the Transaction Account Guarantee Program.
The TLGP does not rely on the taxpayer or the Deposit Insurance Fund to achieve its goals. Participantsin the program must pay assessments for coverage. If fees do not cover costs in the TLGP, the FDIC will impose a special assessment under the systemic risk provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act.
Restoration Plan and Rulemaking on Assessments
On October 7, 2008, the FDIC Board adopted a restoration plan to raise the reserve ratio to at least 1.15 percent within five years and a proposed rule that would raise assessment rates beginning January 1, 2009, and make other changes to the assessment system effective April 1, 2009. The other changes were primarily to ensure that riskier institutions will bear a greater share of the proposed increase in assessments. On December 16, 2008, the Board adopted a final rule raising assessment rates for the first quarter of 2009. On February 27, 2009, the Board amended the restoration plan to extend its horizon from five years to seven years due to extraordinary circumstances. It also adopted a final rule setting rates beginning the second quarter of 2009 and making other changes to the risk-based pricing system.
Rates for the First Quarter of 2009
Changes to Risk-Based Assessments Effective the Second Quarter of 2009
Large Risk Category I Institutions
Note: Institutions are categorized based on supervisory ratings, debt ratings and financial data as of December 31, 2008. Rates do not reflect the application of assessment credits. Percentages may not add to 100 percent due to rounding.
The FDIC anticipates that incorporating the financial ratios method into the large bank method assessment rate would result in a more accurate distribution of initial assessment rates and in timelier assessment rate responses to changing risk profiles, while retaining the market and supervisory perspectives that debt and CAMELS ratings provide.
Unsecured Debt and Tier I Capital
Center for Financial Research
With FDIC’s Vice Chairman as President of the International Association of Deposit Insurers (IADI) and Chair of the IADI Executive Council, the FDIC had a critical role in fulfilling IADI’s mission throughout the year. In October 2008, the FDIC hosted the seventh annual IADI Conference and Annual General Meeting. The conference themes, Financial Stability and Economic Inclusion, provided an excellent platform for over 250 distinguished presenters and guests from 60 countries to discuss the issues facing global banking and the economy and what steps can be taken by deposit insurers to promote financial stability and inclusion around the world.
In its continuing commitment to fostering sound banking in China, the FDIC and the People’s Bank of China co-sponsored a seminar on rural finance held at the FDIC’s Dallas Regional Office. The seminar provided 55 participants from both countries, including rural finance experts in banking, financial regulation, and academia, with an opportunity to share experiences and engage each other in a dialogue on the challenges, best practices, and innovations in rural finance in their countries today. The FDIC also traveled to China to participate in the U.S.-China Bilateral Bank Supervisors meetings, hosted by the China Banking Regulatory Commission (CBRC).
1 The CAMELS component ratings represents either the adequacy of Capital, the quality of Assets, the capability of Management, the quality and level of Earnings, the adequacy of Liquidity, and the Sensitivity to market risk, and ranges from “1” (strongest) to “5” (weakest).
2 Certain deposits that an insured depository institution receives through a deposit placement network on a reciprocal basis would be excluded from the adjusted brokered deposit ratio in Risk category I. They would not be excluded, however, from the brokered deposit adjustment applicable to risk categories II, III, and IV.
3 For a Tier 1 leverage ratio between 5 percent and 6 percent, 10 percent of Tier 1 capital within this range would qualify for the unsecured debt adjustment; for a Tier 1 leverage ratio between 6 percent and 7 percent, 20 percent of Tier 1 capital within this range would qualify; for a Tier 1 leverage ratio between 7 percent and 8 percent, 30 percent of Tier 1 capital within this range would qualify; and so forth. Thus, all Tier 1 capital above a 14 percent leverage ratio would qualify for inclusion in the unsecured debt adjustment.
|Last Updated firstname.lastname@example.org|