|
Attached are the orders and accompanying statements
issued by the FDIC in approving federal deposit insurance
applications filed by MidAm Bank, SB., Clarendon Hills, Ill., and
First Financial Savings Bank SSB, Stevens Point, Wis.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
IN RE:
MidAm Bank, SB
(Proposed New State Nonmember Savings Bank)
Clarendon Hills, Dupage County, Illinois
Application for Federal Deposit Insurance
(Bank Insurance Fund)
ORDER
The Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation has fully considered all available facts and information
relevant to the factors of Section 6 of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Act and relating to the application for federal deposit insurance,
with membership in the Bank Insurance Fund, filed on behalf of
MidAm Bank, SB, a proposed new state chartered nonmember
savings bank, to be located at 115 W. 55th Street, Clarendon Hills,
Dupage County, Illinois, and has concluded that the application
should be approved.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, for the reasons set forth in
the attached Statement, that the application submitted on behalf of
MidAm Bank, SB, for federal deposit insurance be and the same
hereby is approved subject to the following conditions:
- That beginning paid-in capital funds of not less than
$4,500,000 be provided, of which not less than
$2,250,000 shall be allocated to common stock;
- That the Tier 1 capital to assets ratio, as defined in
Part 325 of the Corporation's Rules and Regulations
at the time of application, be maintained at not less
than 8 percent during the first three years of
operation;
- That any changes in proposed management or
proposed ownership (10 percent or more of stock),
including new acquisitions of or subscriptions to 10
percent or more of the stock, will render this
commitment null and void unless such proposal is
approved by the Corporation prior to opening of the
bank;
- That an accrual accounting system be adopted for
maintaining the bank's books;
- That adequate blanket bond coverage be obtained;
- That the bank obtain an audit of financial statements
by an independent public accountant annually for at
least the first five years after deposit insurance is
effective, furnish a copy of any reports by the
independent auditor (including any management
letters) to the appropriate FDIC Regional Director
within 15 days after their receipt by the bank and
notify the appropriate FDIC Regional Director
within 15 days when a change in its independent
auditor occurs;
- That MAF Bancorp, Inc., Clarendon Hills, Illinois, a
thrift holding company, obtain approval of the Office
of Thrift Supervision to acquire voting stock control
of the proposed bank prior to its opening;
- That federal deposit insurance shall not become
effective unless and until the applicant has
been established as a state savings bank (not a
member of the Federal Reserve System), that it has
authority to conduct a banking business, and that its
establishment and operation as a bank have been
fully approved by the appropriate state authority;
- That, until the conditional commitment herein
granted becomes effective, the Corporation shall
have the right to alter, suspend, or withdraw said
commitment should any interim development be
deemed to warrant such action; and
- That if federal deposit insurance has not become
effective within twelve months from the date of this
ORDER, or unless, in the meantime, a request for
an extension of time has been approved by the
Corporation, the consent granted shall expire at the
end of said twelve-month period.
Dated at Washington, D. C., this 28th day of June, 1996.
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Robert E. Feldman
Deputy Executive Secretary
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
IN RE:
MidAm Bank, SB
(Proposed New State Nonmember Savings Bank)
Clarendon Hills, Dupage County, Illinois
Application for Federal Deposit Insurance
(Bank Insurance Fund)
STATEMENT
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 5 of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Act ("FDI Act")(12 U.S.C. § 1815), an application for
federal deposit insurance has been filed on behalf of MidAm Bank,
SB ("MidAm"), a proposed new state chartered nonmember
savings bank with membership in the Bank Insurance Fund ("BIF"),
to be located at 115 W. 55th Street, Clarendon Hills, Dupage
County, Illinois.
The applicant is being organized as a savings bank serving a market
area identified as encompassing the area within a circle with a one
and one-half mile radius from the proposed location in Clarendon
Hills, a residential community approximately ten miles west of the
city of Chicago. The proposed new bank will be located in a
building owned by the affiliated Mid America Federal Savings
Bank, Clarendon Hills, Illinois, a member of the Savings
Association Insurance Fund ("SAIF"). MAF Bancorp, Inc.,
Clarendon Hills, Illinois, a thrift holding company, will be the sole
shareholder of the institution.
For the purposes of this proposal, the investment in fixed assets is
reasonable, capital is adequate, future earnings prospects are
favorable, and management is considered to be satisfactory. The
proposal would not increase the risk to BIF. No objections to this
application have been filed. A review of MidAm's Community
Reinvestment Act Statement and other available information
indicates no apparent inconsistencies with the purpose of that Act.
MidAm will be able to offer more competitive rates than Mid
America Federal Savings Bank due to the lower deposit insurance
premium assessment expense at the BIF-insured institution.
Although MidAm indicates that it does not intend to operate shared
facilities to solicit Mid America Federal Savings Bank customers,
MidAm indicates that Mid America Federal Savings Bank
customers may choose to voluntarily move their accounts to
MidAm as a result of MidAm's ability to offer more competitive
pricing due to the lower deposit insurance premium assessment
expense at the BIF-insured institution. Such voluntary customer
migration raises questions about the impact that such movement, if
widespread, could have on SAIF.
Nothing in the FDI Act specifically prohibits affiliated SAIF and
BIF institutions from adopting a voluntary customer migration
strategy of offering more favorable interest rates at the BIF affiliate
in order to induce new or existing customers to place deposits at
the BIF affiliate in the ordinary course of affairs. While section
5(d) of the FDI Act establishes a definition of a "conversion
transaction" and, subject to exceptions not relevant here, places a
moratorium on such transactions, such a voluntary customer
migration is not within the statutory definition.
Section 5(d)(2)(A) of the FDI Act prohibits any insured depository
institution from engaging in a "conversion transaction" without the
approval of the FDIC and, subject to limited exceptions, prohibits
the FDIC from approving a conversion transaction before SAIF
reaches its designated reserve ratio. The statutory definition of a
conversion transaction in section 5(d)(2)(B) of the FDI Act is
limited to five specific items. These are (i) any change in
membership of an insured depository institution from one insurance
fund to the other, (ii) the merger of a BIF and SAIF member, (iii)
the assumption of deposit liabilities by a BIF or SAIF member from
a member of the other insurance fund, (iv) the transfer of assets
from a member of one insurance fund to a member of the other in
consideration of the assumption of deposit liabilities and (v) the
transfer of deposits from a member of one insurance fund to a
member of the other in the case of a failed insured depository
institution. A voluntary customer migration between affiliated
institutions is not encompassed by any of these five specific items.
Neither the language of the conversion transaction definition nor its
legislative history indicates that the definition is merely a
representative listing, or that the definition encompasses every
arrangement that results in a shift of deposits between affiliated BIF
and SAIF institutions. Indeed, the language of the definition says
that a conversion transaction "means" the five specified items.
Additionally, the fact that Congress took action to add a new
transaction to the definition after the original version was enacted
as part of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and
Enforcement Act of 1989, covering a transaction that had a result
similar to the existing transactions, indicates that Congress views
the definition as an exclusive list. Moreover, the original definition
as reported to the House contained a provision that would have
covered any annual "transfer" of deposits exceeding ten percent of
an institution's deposit base; however, Congress adopted the Senate
version instead, which did not include the transfer of deposits
provision. H.R. 1278, § 206, H.R. Rep. 101-54 Part 1, 101st
Cong. 1st Sess. 14-15 (1989).
The FDIC is concerned with the use of BIF affiliates of SAIF
member institutions for the purpose of evading the statutory
moratorium on insurance fund conversions. To the extent that
business strategies -- as outlined in insurance applications or as
carried out in practice at institutions with existing BIF/SAIF
affiliations -- amount to the factual equivalent of a merger,
consolidation, or other transaction constituting a conversion, the
FDIC will take appropriate steps to stop such practices. However,
after careful consideration of the facts presented by this application
and the pertinent legal standard, the Board has concluded that this
is not such a case.
The Board is also required to review all deposit insurance
applications in light of the statutory factors under section 6 of the
FDI Act (12 U.S.C. § 1816). Given that MidAm's proposed
business plan is not otherwise prohibited by law, and that the
applicants' proposal otherwise complies with the specified financial,
management, and community needs factors under section 6, the
application satisfies these factors.
Although MidAm does not currently propose to solicit Mid
America Federal Savings Bank deposit customers through agent
relationships with Mid America Federal Savings Bank branches or
through shared facilities, the Board of Directors is concerned that
customer confusion could arise to the extent that it later chose to
do so. The Board of Directors is also concerned that each
institution be operated on a fully separate basis. The applicant has
committed to take specified steps to address these matters.
Compliance with existing and future agency guidance in this area is
expected.
Accordingly, based upon a careful evaluation of all available facts
and information, the Board of Directors has concluded that
approval of the application is warranted.
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
IN RE:
First Financial Savings Bank, SSB
(Proposed New State Nonmember Savings Bank)
Stevens Point, Portage County, Wisconsin
Application for Federal Deposit Insurance
(Bank Insurance Fund)
ORDER
The Board of Directors has fully considered all available facts and
information relevant to the factors of Section 6 of the Federal
Deposit Insurance Act and relating to the application for federal
deposit insurance, with membership in the Bank Insurance Fund,
filed on behalf of First Financial Savings Bank, SSB, a proposed
new state chartered nonmember savings bank to be located at 1325
Church Street, Stevens Point, Portage County, Wisconsin, and has
concluded that the application should be approved.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, for the reasons set forth in
the attached Statement, that the application submitted on behalf of
First Financial Savings Bank, SSB for federal deposit insurance be
and the same is hereby approved, subject to the following
conditions:
- That beginning paid-in capital funds of not less than
$5,000,000 be provided, of which not less than
$2,000 shall be allocated to common stock;
- That the Tier 1 capital to assets ratio, as defined in
Part 325 of the Corporation's Rules and Regulations
at the time of application, be maintained at not less
than eight percent during the first three years of
operation;
- That any changes in proposed management or
proposed ownership (10 percent or more of stock),
including acquisitions of or subscriptions to 10
percent or more of the stock, will render this
commitment null and void unless such proposal is
approved by the Corporation prior to opening of the
bank;
- That an accrual accounting system be adopted for
maintaining the bank's books;
- That adequate blanket bond coverage be obtained;
- That the bank obtain an audit of financial statements
by an independent public accountant annually for at
least the first five years after deposit insurance is
effective, furnish a copy of any reports by the
independent auditor (including any management
letters) to the appropriate FDIC Regional Director
within 15 days after their receipt by the bank and
notify the appropriate FDIC Regional Director within
15 days when a change in its independent auditor
occurs;
- That First Financial Corporation, Stevens Point,
Wisconsin, a thrift holding company, obtain approval
of the Office of Thrift Supervision to acquire voting
stock control of the proposed bank prior to its
opening;
- That federal deposit insurance shall not become
effective unless and until the applicant has been
established as a state savings bank (not a member of
the Federal Reserve System), that it has authority to
conduct a banking business, and that its establishment
and operation as a bank have been fully approved by
the appropriate state authority;
- That, until the conditional approval herein granted
becomes effective, the Corporation shall have the
right to alter, suspend, or withdraw said approval
should any interim development be deemed to warrant
such action; and
- That if federal deposit insurance has not become effective
within twelve months from the date of this Order, or unless,
in the meantime, a request for an extension of time has been
approved by the Corporation, the consent granted shall
expire at the end of said twelve-month period.
Dated at Washington, D. C., this 28th day of June, 1996.
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Robert E. Feldman
Deputy Executive Secretary
IN RE:
First Financial Savings Bank, SSB
(Proposed New State Nonmember Savings Bank)
Stevens Point, Portage County, Wisconsin
Application for Federal Deposit Insurance
(Bank Insurance Fund)
STATEMENT
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 5 of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Act ("FDI Act")(12 U.S.C. § 1815), an application for
federal deposit insurance with membership in the Bank Insurance
Fund ("BIF") has been filed on behalf of First Financial Savings
Bank, SSB ("Savings Bank"), a proposed new state nonmember
savings bank to be located at 1325 Church Street, Stevens Point,
Portage County, Wisconsin.
Savings Bank is being organized as a wholly-owned subsidiary of
First Financial Corporation, Stevens Point, Wisconsin, a thrift
holding company and parent of First Financial Bank, FSB, Stevens
Point, Wisconsin, a member of the Savings Association Insurance
Fund ("SAIF"). The proposed new bank will initially operate out
of one office which will share quarters with an existing office of
First Financial Bank, FSB. The designated market area is defined
as the city of Stevens Point and most of the northern half of
Portage County. This area, with a population of approximately
75,000, has a strong agricultural sector as well as a broad industrial
and services base. The competitive environment is strong with
several of the competitors representing, or affiliated with, large
financial institutions. The proposed bank would have no apparent
adverse effect on the competitive environment. A review of the
proposed bank's Community Reinvestment Act Statement and other
available information indicates no apparent inconsistencies with the
purposes of that Act.
The proposed investment in fixed assets is reasonable, capital is
adequate, future earnings prospects are reasonable, and
management is considered satisfactory. The proposal does not
appear to present an undue risk to BIF.
Savings Bank has indicated that customers of First Financial Bank,
FSB may be encouraged through various pricing and marketing
incentives to place maturing deposits from First Financial Bank,
FSB into accounts at Savings Bank, because the Savings Bank will
be able to offer more competitive rates than First Financial Bank,
FSB due to the lower deposit insurance premium assessment
expense at the BIF-insured institution. Such a voluntary customer
migration strategy raises questions about the impact that such
efforts, if widespread, could have on SAIF.
Nothing in the FDI Act specifically prohibits affiliated SAIF and
BIF institutions from adopting a voluntary customer migration
strategy of offering more favorable interest rates at the BIF affiliate
and advising new customers or existing customers of the SAIF
affiliate that more favorable interest rates can be obtained by
placing deposits at the BIF affiliate in the ordinary course of affairs.
While section 5(d) of the FDI Act establishes a definition of a
"conversion transaction" and, subject to exceptions not relevant
here, places a moratorium on such transactions, such a voluntary
customer migration is not within the statutory definition.
Section 5(d)(2)(A) of the FDI Act prohibits any insured depository
institution from engaging in a "conversion transaction" without the
approval of the FDIC and, subject to limited exceptions, prohibits
the FDIC from approving a conversion transaction before SAIF
reaches its designated reserve ratio. The statutory definition of a
conversion transaction in section 5(d)(2)(B) of the FDI Act is
limited to five specific items. These are (i) any change in
membership of an insured depository institution from one insurance
fund to the other, (ii) the merger of a BIF and SAIF member, (iii)
the assumption of deposit liabilities by a BIF or SAIF member from
a member of the other insurance fund, (iv) the transfer of assets
from a member of one insurance fund to a member of the other in
consideration of the assumption of deposit liabilities and (v) the
transfer of deposits from a member of one insurance fund to a
member of the other in the case of a failed insured depository
institution. A voluntary customer migration between affiliated
institutions is not encompassed by any of these five specific items.
Neither the language of the conversion transaction definition nor its
legislative history indicates that the definition is merely a
representative listing, or that the definition encompasses every
arrangement that results in a shift of deposits between affiliated BIF
and SAIF institutions. Indeed, the language of the definition says
that a conversion transaction "means" the five specified items.
Additionally, the fact that Congress took action to add a new
transaction to the definition after the original version was enacted
as part of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and
Enforcement Act of 1989, covering a transaction that had a result
similar to the existing transactions, indicates that Congress views
the definition as an exclusive list. Moreover, the original definition
as reported to the House contained a provision that would have
covered any annual "transfer" of deposits exceeding ten percent of
an institution's deposit base; however, Congress adopted the Senate
version instead, which did not include the transfer of deposits
provision. H.R. 1278, § 206, H.R. Rep. 101-54 Part 1, 101st
Cong. 1st Sess. 14-15 (1989).
The FDIC is concerned with the use of BIF affiliates of SAIF
member institutions for the purpose of evading the statutory
moratorium on insurance fund conversions. To the extent that
business strategies -- as outlined in insurance applications or as
carried out in practice at institutions with existing BIF/SAIF
affiliations -- amount to the factual equivalent of a merger,
consolidation, or other transaction constituting a conversion, the
FDIC will take appropriate steps to stop such practices. However,
after careful consideration of the facts presented by this application
and the pertinent legal standard, the Board has concluded that this
is not such a case.
The Board is also required to review all deposit insurance
applications in light of the statutory factors under section 6 of the
FDI Act (12 U.S.C. § 1816). Given that Savings Bank's proposed
business plan is not otherwise prohibited by law, and that the
applicants' proposal otherwise complies with the specified financial,
management, and community needs factors under section 6, the
application satisfies these factors.
The Board is concerned about customer confusion arising from the
fact that Savings Bank and First Financial Bank, FSB will offer
certain services as each other's agents or through shared branches.
Institutions engaged in either tandem or agent branching are
charged with the responsibility to observe scrupulously procedures
sufficient to eliminate customer confusion about the separate
identity of the institutions and to maintain full operational
separation between the affiliates. The federal bank regulatory
agencies have issued guidance about these concerns from time to
time and plan to issue additional guidance in the near future.
Institutions engaging in tandem or agent branching should consult
with their state and federal supervisors to ensure all concerns in this
area are dealt with in a satisfactory fashion. The applicant has
committed to take specified steps to address these matters.
Compliance with existing and future agency guidance in the area is
expected.
The American Bankers Association (ABA) and the Wisconsin
Bankers Association (WBA) filed formal objections to the proposal.
The ABA also requested an oral hearing in connection with their
objection. In a separate action, the Board has denied the hearing
request because the ABA's comments consist of issues which are
sufficiently addressed through their written submissions and factual
issues which are sufficiently addressed by the FDIC's inquiries in
connection with the application. The ABA and WBA argue that
the applicant's proposal is contrary to the conversion moratorium
and raises issues about customer confusion. As discussed above,
the conversion moratorium does not apply to the proposed
arrangement and customer confusion issues have been taken into
account.
Accordingly, based upon a careful evaluation of all available
relevant facts and information, including that provided by the
objectors, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of
the application is warranted.
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
#####
Congress created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in 1933
to restore public confidence in the nation's banking system. The
FDIC insures deposits at the nation's 12,000 banks and savings
associations and it promotes safety and soundness of these institutions
by identifying, monitoring and addressing risks to which they are
exposed.
_____
FDIC press releases and other documents may be obtained through the
FDIC's Public Information Center, 801 17th Street, NW, Room 100,
Washington, DC, ((703) 562-2200)
|