Skip to main content
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government
Dot gov
The .gov means it’s official. 
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
Https
The site is secure. 
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Federal Register Publications

FDIC Federal Register Citations



Home > Regulation & Examinations > Laws & Regulations > FDIC Federal Register Citations




FDIC Federal Register Citations


MICHIGAN COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT CORPORATION

March 8, 2004
 

Robert E. Feldman
Executive Secretary Attention: Comments
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
550 17th Street NW
Washington DC, 20429

Dear Officials of Federal Bank and Thrift Agencies:

As a member of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, Michigan Community Reinvestment Corporation urges you to withdraw the proposed changes to the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulations. CRA has been instrumental in increasing access to homeownership, boosting economic development, and expanding small businesses in the nation's minority, immigrant, and low-and moderate-income communities. Your proposed changes are contrary to the CRA statute because they will halt the progress made in community reinvestment.

The proposed CRA changes will thwart the Administration's goals of improving the economic status of immigrants and creating 5.5 million new minority homeowners by the end of the decade. Instead, the proposed CRA changes would facilitate predatory lending and reduce the ability of the general public to hold financial institutions accountable for compliance with consumer protection laws.

The proposed changes include three major elements: 1) provide streamlined and cursory exams for banks with assets between $250 million and $500 million; 2) establish a weak predatory lending compliance standard under CRA, and 3) expand data collection and reporting for small business and home lending. The beneficial impacts of the third proposal are overwhelmed by the damage imposed by the first two proposals. In addition, the federal banking agencies did not update procedures regarding affiliates and assessment areas in their proposal, and thus missed a vital opportunity to continue CRA's effectiveness.

Streamlined and Cursory Exams. Under the current CRA regulations, large banks with assets of at least $250 million are rated by performance evaluations that scrutinize their level of lending, investing, and services to low-and moderate-income communities. The proposed changes will eliminate the investment and service parts of the CRA exam for banks and thrifts with assets between $250 and $500 million. The proposed changes would reduce the rigor of CRA exams for 1,111 banks that account for more than $387 billion in assets.

The elimination of the investment and service tests for more than 1,100 banks translates into considerably less access to banking services and capital for underserved communities.

For example, these banks would no longer be held accountable under CRA exams for investing in Low Income Housing Tax Credits, which have been a major source of affordable rental housing needed by large numbers of immigrants and lower income segments of the minority population. Likewise, the banks would no longer be held accountable for the provision of bank branches, checking accounts, Individual Development Accounts (IDAs), or debit card services. Thus, the effectiveness of the Administration's housing and community development programs would be diminished. Moreover, the federal bank agencies will fail to enforce CRA.'s statutory requirement that banks have a continuing and affirmative obligation to serve credit and deposit needs if they eliminate the investment and service test for a large subset of depository institutions.

Predatory Lending Standard. The proposed CRA changes contain an anti-predatory screen that will actually perpetuate abusive lending. The proposed standard states that loans based on the foreclosure value of the collateral, instead of the ability of the borrower to repay, can result in downgrades in CRA ratings. The asset-based standard falls short because it will not cover many instances of predatory lending. For example, abusive lending would not result in lower CRA ratings when it strips equity without leading to delinquency or foreclosure. In other words, borrowers can have the necessary income to afford monthly payments, but they are still losing wealth as a result of a lender's excessive fees or unnecessary products.

We recommend that you withdraw the proposal to change CRA regulations. Defend the rights of the community, move towards strengthening CRA and encourage growth of banks investment and services to Low- and Moderate-Income Communities.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter,

Veronica L. Williams
President & CEO
Michigan Community Reinvestment Corporation
P.O. Box 351274
Detroit, MI  48235

cc: President George Bush
Office of the Comptroller
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Office of the Thrift Supervision


Last Updated 03/12/2004 regs@fdic.gov

Last Updated: August 4, 2024