96-19170. Policy Statement Concerning Adjustments to the Insurance Premiums  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 146 (Monday, July 29, 1996)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 39453-39455]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-19170]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    FARM CREDIT SYSTEM INSURANCE CORPORATION
    
    [BM-11-JUL-96-02]
    
    
    Policy Statement Concerning Adjustments to the Insurance Premiums
    
    AGENCY: Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation.
    
    ACTION: Notice of policy statement.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation (Corporation) 
    announces that it has adopted a Policy Statement Concerning Adjustments 
    to the Insurance Premiums. This policy statement establishes a 
    semiannual review process, using the criteria announced in the Board's 
    March proposal, as a basis for the Corporation's exercise of its 
    discretion to adjust premiums in response to changing conditions. It 
    also establishes a premium floor of 7.5 basis points for loans in 
    accrual status until the Insurance Fund reaches the level specified in 
    the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended (the Act); 12 U.S.C. 2277a-4. 
    Finally, it adds two clarifications to the March proposal. The policy 
    states the express authority of the Corporation to reduce premiums to 
    zero on loans guaranteed by Federal or State governments. It also makes 
    it clear that the Board will consider asset growth, not merely loan 
    growth, when it does its semiannual review.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: July 11, 1996.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dorothy L. Nichols, General Counsel, 
    Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, 
    McLean, Virginia 22102, (703) 883-4380, TDD (703) 883-4444.
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        In 1987, Congress directed the Corporation to collect premiums to 
    reach the secure base amount, which is defined as 2 percent of the 
    aggregate outstanding insured obligations of all insured banks 
    (excluding a percentage of State and Federally guaranteed loans) or 
    such other percentage of the aggregate amount as the Corporation in its 
    sole discretion determines is ``actuarially sound.''
        The statute specifies a limited form of risk-based premium 
    assessments: 25 basis points for nonaccrual loans; 15 basis points for 
    loans in accrual status (excluding certain State and Federally 
    guaranteed loans); and a very modest premium for government-guaranteed 
    loans. This formula was designed as an incentive for the Farm Credit 
    System to make quality loans and at the same time build the Insurance 
    Fund to a level that Congress believed would prevent a default on a 
    System debt obligation. The Insurance Fund represents the Corporation's 
    equity, i.e., the difference between its total assets ($1,023 million 
    as of yearend 1995) and its total liabilities, including its insurance 
    obligations ($121 million as of yearend 1995).
        While Congress gave the Corporation the discretion to reduce the 
    premium assessments before reaching the secure base amount in the Farm 
    Credit System Reform Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-105, 110 Stat. 162 
    (Feb. 10, 1996), it did not alter the original mandate to reach and 
    maintain the secure base amount. In the policy statement, the 
    Corporation concludes that under these circumstances, any reduction in 
    premium must take into account its impact on the original mandate.
        Neither the statute nor the legislative history provides guidance 
    on how the Corporation is to balance the Congressional desire to reach 
    the secure base amount with the new discretionary authority. Nor does 
    the legislative history provide guidance as to the appropriate 
    timeframe for reaching the secure base amount. However, it is clear 
    from the legislative history creating the Corporation that Congress was 
    focused on assuring that the taxpayer would not be required to rescue 
    the Farm Credit System again, as they had been in the mid-eighties. 
    Past experience demonstrates that under severe stress, the Farm Credit 
    System suffered $4.6 billion in losses from 1985--1987 and had to 
    borrow $1.3 billion in U.S. Treasury-guaranteed bonds to assist 
    institutions experiencing financial difficulty. It is also clear that 
    Congress intended that the Fund be built in anticipation of potential 
    problems in the Farm Credit System by assessing each insured bank until 
    the Insurance Fund reached 2 percent of outstanding
    
    [[Page 39454]]
    
    insured debt obligations. Recently, Congress reaffirmed the importance 
    of the Insurance Fund's protection of investors and taxpayers when it 
    provided reserve accounts for amounts above the secure base. The funds 
    in these accounts cannot be refunded to insured banks until 8 years 
    after the Insurance Fund exceeds the secure base amount and in no event 
    before January 1, 2005. These funds will provide an additional layer of 
    insurance protection.
        It is instructive as well that in the eighties financial 
    difficulties in the banking industry often were unanticipated as early 
    as 2 years prior to failure. Thus, pushing achievement of the secure 
    base amount off too far in the future ignores the real risks that exist 
    in lending beyond the immediate time horizon. Also, it ignores the fact 
    that problems in agricultural lending tend to hit many institutions at 
    the same time. This would conflict with the Corporation's duty as a 
    prudent insurer to consider such possibilities for the protection of 
    the Farm Credit System's investors. Thus, achieving the secure base 
    amount quickly while the Farm Credit System is in good health is 
    important because it would be difficult to revert to the statutory 
    assessment from a very low assessment during times of financial stress. 
    Substantially higher assessments then could result in adverse effects 
    on bank earnings and capital precisely when the Farm Credit System 
    could least afford the extra cost. Finally, Congress recognized the 
    importance of redressing inequities in initial assessments to 
    capitalize the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation 
    (FAC) when it recently authorized rebates to associations that paid 
    these assessments from the Insurance Fund, totaling $56 million, to be 
    paid 8 years after the secure base amount is reached. Delay in reaching 
    the secure base amount due to reduced premiums paid by the banks delays 
    resolution of this issue.
        Congress believed that the premium assessment system should 
    incorporate a higher rate for nonaccruing loans to provide an incentive 
    to control risk-taking while at the same time covering the long-term 
    costs of the insurer's obligations through a lower premium assessment 
    on loans in accrual status. This limited form of risk-based premiums 
    provides an incentive for sound credit extension and administration.
        For these reasons, the policy statement concludes that, while the 
    Corporation may reduce premiums, it should continue to assess 
    sufficient premiums to reach the secure base in a reasonable time 
    period. To continue providing an incentive to control risk-taking, the 
    policy statement indicates that the Corporation does not intend to 
    reduce the premium on loans in nonaccrual status. In determining 
    whether to adjust premiums on loans in accrual status, the Corporation 
    will consider a number of pertinent factors including: (1) The current 
    level of the Insurance Fund and the amount and time needed to reach the 
    secure base amount; (2) the condition of the Farm Credit System; (3) 
    the probability and likely amount of any losses to the Insurance Fund; 
    and (4) multiple scenarios reflecting the impact of the potential 
    growth on the time frame required to achieve the secure base amount. In 
    the final policy statement, the third factor has been modified to make 
    it clear that the Board will consider asset growth. Assets would 
    include investments as well as loans.
        Furthermore, to ensure steady progress towards the secure base 
    amount, the Corporation has decided to establish a premium floor, as 
    described in the policy statement. Thus, premiums on loans in accrual 
    status may be reduced below the statutory rate of 15 basis points but 
    will not be reduced below the premium floor until the secure base 
    amount is reached.
    
    Public Comments
    
        The policy statement was published for public comment in the 
    Federal Register on April 17, 1996 (61 FR 16788). The Corporation 
    received 48 comment letters, all from Farm Credit institutions or their 
    representatives. Most of the letters commend the Corporation for 
    addressing this issue in an expeditious manner. All but two of the 
    comment letters are supportive of the policy statement.
        One Farm Credit bank, commenting for a borrower association as 
    well, urged the Board to take a different approach than the general 
    guidelines listed in the policy statement. It recommended that the 
    Board adopt ``more definite and concrete'' criteria to be used in 
    setting the assessment level, and it would leave full discretion, using 
    those criteria, to set any premium level from 15 basis points to zero. 
    Also, five associations, commenting together, urged the Board not to 
    set a premium floor. Another bank was generally supportive of the 
    policy statement, but suggested a 5 basis point premium floor, rather 
    than the 7.5 specified in the policy statement. Thirty-two (32) 
    commenters support the premium floor, most agreed with the Board that 
    it is important to reach the secure base amount in a reasonable time 
    (this includes four Farm Credit banks). After considering the diverse 
    views provided by the comments, the Board has decided to finalize the 
    policy statement without modifying the general guidelines or the 
    premium floor.
        Two commenters sought a clarification concerning premiums on 
    government-guaranteed loans. They suggested that the policy state 
    expressly that premiums on guaranteed loans can be decreased to zero in 
    the Board's discretion. The Board agrees that it has this authority and 
    it has added a sentence to the policy to make that clear.
        Some commenters expressed support for leaving the premium on loans 
    in nonaccrual status at 25 basis points. None of the comments 
    recommended a reduction. The final policy statement leaves the 
    insurance premium for nonaccrual loans at 25 basis points.
        One Farm Credit bank understood the policy statement to leave the 
    premium on loans in nonaccrual status at 25 basis points even after the 
    secure base is achieved, and indicated it would support this decision. 
    Another sought a clarification on this issue and indicated its belief 
    that once the secure base is achieved premiums must be reduced on 
    nonaccrual loans. This policy statement only deals with the 
    Corporation's discretionary authority to reduce premiums prior to the 
    Insurance Fund reaching the secure base. Thus, it does not address the 
    issue raised by these two commenters.
        Five associations, commenting together, encouraged the Board not to 
    consider the recently authorized Financial Assistance Corporation 
    repayment as a factor in its deliberations. One bank, on the other 
    hand, expressed its belief that it is an appropriate consideration. The 
    Board continues to believe, as it states above in the supplementary 
    information, that delay in reaching the secure base amount due to 
    reduced premiums also delays the Congressionally authorized rebates.
        Forty-three (43) commenters believe the Board should exercise its 
    discretion to reduce the premiums. In many of these comments the 
    inference was that a reduction would have no adverse effect on the 
    Insurance Fund. Others stated their belief that there would be no 
    adverse effect. Four commenters, all associations, recommended that the 
    Board leave the premiums at their present level until the secure base 
    amount is reached (one of these indicated that the institution would 
    benefit from the FAC repayment). One commenter supported a reduction in 
    the premiums, but not until 1997 so that the secure base could be 
    reached sooner and then an even more meaningful
    
    [[Page 39455]]
    
    reduction could be enjoyed by all. The Board has finalized the policy 
    statement and it is conducting its first semi-annual review, using the 
    criteria set out in the policy. It will make its determination public 
    in the near future.
    
    Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation Policy Statement Concerning 
    Adjustments to the Insurance Premiums
    
    BM-11-JUL-96-02
    
        Effective Date: July 11, 1996.
        Effect on Previous Action: None.
    
        Source of Authority: Section 5.55 of the Farm Credit Act of 
    1971, as amended (the Act); 12 U.S.C. 2277a-4.
    
        Whereas, section 5.52 of the Act established the Farm Credit System 
    Insurance Corporation (Corporation) to, among other things, insure the 
    timely payment of principal and interest on Farm Credit System 
    obligations (12 U.S.C. 2277a-1); and
        Whereas, section 5.55 of the Act mandates that the Corporation 
    collect premiums from all insured Farm Credit System banks until the 
    Insurance Fund reaches the secure base amount, which is defined as 2 
    percent of the aggregate outstanding insured obligations of all insured 
    banks (excluding a percentage of State and Federally guaranteed loans) 
    or such other percentage of the aggregate amount as the Corporation 
    determines is actuarially sound; and
        Whereas, the Farm Credit System Reform Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 
    104-105, 110 Stat. 162 (Feb. 10, 1996), amended section 5.55 of the Act 
    to permit the Corporation to exercise its discretion to adjust the 
    premium assessments applied to all insured Farm Credit System banks 
    before the Insurance Fund reaches the secure base amount;
        Whereas, any reduction in the premium schedule must take into 
    account its impact on the original mandate to reach the secure base 
    amount. Now therefore, the Corporation's Board of Directors (Board) 
    adopts the following policy statement to govern adjustments to premiums 
    in response to changing conditions.
        The Board will review the premium assessment schedule at least 
    semiannually in order to determine whether to exercise its discretion 
    to adjust the premium assessments in response to changing conditions. 
    The Board may reduce the premiums when the Farm Credit System 
    demonstrates good health and sound risk management and other conditions 
    warrant, and raise premiums to the statutory level if, for example, the 
    Insurance Fund suffers a significant loss or if bank capital or 
    collateral decreases significantly before the secure base amount is 
    achieved.
        As a basis for its decision the Board will consider the following:
        1. The current level of the Insurance Fund and the amount of money 
    and time needed to reach the secure base amount in light of potential 
    growth;
        2. The likelihood and probable amount of any losses to the 
    Insurance Fund;
        3. The overall condition of the Farm Credit System, including the 
    level and quality of capital, earnings, asset growth, asset quality, 
    loss allowance levels, asset liability management, as well as the 
    collateral ratios of the 8 banks;
        4. The health and prospects for the agricultural economy, including 
    the potential impact of governmental farm policy and the effect of the 
    globalization of agriculture on opportunities and competition for U.S. 
    producers; and
        5. The risks in the financial environment that may cause a problem, 
    even when there is no imminent threat, such as volatility in the level 
    of interest rates, the use of sophisticated investment securities and 
    derivative instruments, and increasing competition from non-System 
    financial institutions.
        In its review of the premium assessments, the Board will consider 
    multiple scenarios that reflect the impact of potential growth in Farm 
    Credit System debt levels on the time required to achieve the secure 
    base amount. The secure base amount should be achieved while the Farm 
    Credit System is in good health with very few problem institutions. 
    Therefore, the Board will not reduce the premium below 7.5 basis points 
    on loans in accrual status until the secure base amount is achieved. 
    Thus, the premium on loans in accrual status will be set between 7.5 
    basis points and the statutory rate of 15 basis points. The premium on 
    guaranteed loans will be set between zero and the statutory rate of 1.5 
    basis points for Federal and 3 basis points for state. Furthermore, the 
    Board will not reduce the premium on loans in nonaccrual status, to 
    continue providing an incentive for sound credit extension and 
    administration.
    
        Adopted this 11th day of July, 1996 by order of the Corporation 
    Board.
    
        Dated: July 23, 1996.
    Floyd Fithian,
    Secretary to the Board, Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation.
    [FR Doc. 96-19170 Filed 7-26-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6710-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
7/11/1996
Published:
07/29/1996
Department:
Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Notice of policy statement.
Document Number:
96-19170
Dates:
July 11, 1996.
Pages:
39453-39455 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
BM-11-JUL-96-02
PDF File:
96-19170.pdf