100% free download of CRCM PDF Questions and questions and answers

We have valid and up-to-date CRCM dumps, that really work in the actual CRCM exam. This website provides the latest tips and tricks to pass CRCM exam with our questions and answers. With the information base of CRCM questions bank, you do not have to squander your chance on perusing Certified Regulatory Compliance Manager reference books, Just go through 24 hours to master our CRCM brain dumps and answers and step through the exam.

Exam Code: CRCM Practice test 2022 by Killexams.com team
CRCM Certified Regulatory Compliance Manager

A compliance manager's responsibilities generally include direct compliance risk program management and/or validation of compliance risk control effectiveness. The execution of operational business processes incorporating compliance risk controls is not a function or duty generally performed by a compliance manager as a normal and customary job responsibility and thus does not qualify towards meeting the experience requirement.

To satisfy the Professional Experience requirement, primary responsibility for the full range of compliance risk functions is required. Compliance risk functions include, but are not limited to:

Performing compliance risk assessments, audits or examinations, or Developing, implementing, and/or managing all aspects of a compliance risk management program to ensure compliance with U.S. federal laws and regulations.
These jobs are typically found within corporate compliance, legal, audit departments (internal or external), Regulatory Agencies, or dedicated compliance practices within consulting firms. Job responsibilities must be primarily focused on compliance risk management:

Program design, implementation and oversight, Consultation as a subject-matter expert, Administration, enforcement or audit of compliance-related policies, procedures and processes to manage compliance risk, and/or Examination of a bank's compliance program.

Task 1: Act as a compliance subject matter expert on projects and committees.
Task 2: Evaluate development of, or changes to, products, services, processes, and systems to determine compliance risk and impacts and ensure policies remain compliant.
Task 3: Provide compliance support to internal and external parties (e.g., answer questions, review marketing and external communications, conduct research and analysis).
Task 4: Review and/or provide compliance training to applicable parties.
Task 5: Participate in conducting due diligence for vendors.
Task 6: Design and maintain a comprehensive compliance risk assessment program to identify and mitigate risk within the organizations risk appetite.
Task 7: Conduct compliance risk assessments in accordance with the risk assessment program to evaluate relevant information (e.g., inherent risk, control environment, residual risk, potential for consumer harm) and communicate results to applicable parties.

The following knowledge is required to perform the tasks within Domain 1:
• All applicable laws, regulations, and guidance
Other essential CRCM knowledge:
• Risk assessment program scope and objectives
• Compliance risk appetite (e.g., thresholds, escalation points, pass/fail rates)
• Banks products, services, processes, market area, and operations
• Regulatory and industry landscape
• Risk rating methodology
• Key risk indicators (KRIs)
• Volume and severity of known compliance incidents, breakdowns, and/or customer complaints
• Compliance policies, procedures, and other internal controls (e.g., quality assurance, independent testing)
• Exam/audit and internal compliance monitoring results
• Volume and complexity of products, transactions, and customer base
• recent changes to compliance regulations, key personnel, products, services, systems, and/or processes
• Volume and complexity of products and services provided by third parties

Domain 2: Compliance Monitoring (25%)
Task 1: Define the scope of a specific monitoring or testing activity.
Task 2: Test compliance policies, procedures, controls, and transactions against regulatory requirements to identify risks and potential exceptions.
Task 3: Review and confirm potential exceptions, findings, and recommendations with business units and issue final report to senior management.
Task 4: Validate that any required remediation was completed accurately and within required timelines.
Task 5: Administer a complaint management program.
Task 6: Review first line compliance monitoring results and develop an action plan as needed.
Task 7: Evaluate the reliability of systems of record and the validity of data within those systems that areused for compliance monitoring.

The following knowledge is required to perform the tasks within Domain 2:
• All applicable laws, regulations, and guidance.
Other essential CRCM knowledge:
• Regulator expectations
• Banks products, services, processes, market area, and operations
• Compliance policies, procedures, and controls
• Applicable source data
• Target audience
• Compliance risk rating methodology
• Compliance risk appetite (e.g., thresholds, escalation points, pass/fail rates)
• Complaints received internally and externally, including volumes, sources, trends, and root causes
• Regulatory expectations on complaint management program administration
• Complaint handling procedures
• Critical systems and usage by the business units
• recent changes to critical systems or processes

Domain 3: Governance and Oversight (10%)
Task 1: Establish and maintain a compliance management policy to set expectations for board, senior management, and business unit responsibilities.
Task 2: Develop, conduct, and track enterprise-wide and/or job-specific compliance training.
Task 3: Conduct periodic reviews of the compliance management program to evaluate its effectiveness and communicate results to appropriate parties.
The following knowledge is required to perform the tasks within Domain 3:
• Regulatory expectations
• Compliance risk appetite (e.g., thresholds, escalation points, pass/fail rates)
• Banks products, services, processes, and operations
• Employee roles and responsibilities
• Compliance risk assessment results
• Regulatory change environment
• Compliance monitoring results
• Compliance audit/exam findings
• Compliance management policy (CMP)
• Volume and severity of known compliance incidents, breakdowns, and/or customer complaints

Domain 4: Regulatory Change Management (15%)
Task 1: Monitor and evaluate applicable regulatory agency notifications for new compliance regulations or changes to existing regulations to assess potential regulatory impacts and remediation needs.
Task 2: Assess new, revised, or proposed regulatory changes for compliance impacts, communicate to the appropriate parties, and develop action plans as needed.
Task 3: Assess regulatory guidance and compliance enforcement actions to determine if remediation is required to address potential compliance impacts.
Task 4: Report on the status of regulatory changes and implementation to appropriate parties.
Task 5: Monitor and validate action plans for confirmed regulatory impacts to ensure timely adherence to the mandatory compliance date.
The following knowledge is required to perform the tasks within Domain 4:
• All applicable laws, regulations, and guidance.
Other essential CRCM knowledge:
• Banks products, services, processes, market area, and operations
• Key stakeholders
• Timeline and extent of impact to business units
• Planned changes to critical systems
• New or revised compliance policies, procedures, controls, and training
• Changes to banks products, services, processes, market area, and operations
• Penalties and potential restitution for non-compliance
• Scope of impacts

Domain 5: Regulator and Auditor Compliance Management (11%)
Task 1: Prepare and review requested audit/exam materials to ensure timely and accurate fulfillment and self-identify potential areas of concern.
Task 2: Participate in audit/exam meetings to provide business overviews, address questions, discuss findings, or provide updates to appropriate parties.
Task 3: Review and draft responses to audit/exam results and ensure action plans are developed and communicated to appropriate parties.
Task 4: Report on action plan status to appropriate levels of management and auditors/examiners.
Task 5: Coordinate and submit ongoing regulatory reports to auditors/examiners.
The following knowledge is required to perform the tasks within Domain 5:
• All applicable laws, regulations, and guidance.
Other essential CRCM knowledge:
• Banks products, services, processes, market area, and operations
• Key stakeholders
• Compliance policies, procedures, and controls
• Critical systems and usage by the business units
• Services provided by third parties
• Compliance risk appetite (e.g., thresholds, escalation points, pass/fail rates)
• Effectiveness of actions taken
• Regulatory expectations
• Top risk, emerging risk, and areas of continued focus
• New bank products, services, processes, market area, and operations

Domain 6: Compliance Analysis and Internal/External Reporting (11%)
Task 1: Analyze and validate data to support regulatory reporting and ensure accuracy and comprehensiveness.
Task 2: Complete required reporting, ensure timely submission to the appropriate agency, and resubmit when required.
Task 3: Develop, implement, and monitor a plan of action to prevent future reporting errors or breakdowns.
The following knowledge is required to perform the tasks within Domain 6:
• CRA
• HMDA
• BSA (CTR, SARS)
• OFAC
• Regulation Z (Credit card agreements, marketing on college campuses)
• Regulation II
• Banks products, services, processes, market area, and operations
• Critical systems and usage by the business units
• Findings and root causes
• Compliance policies, procedures, and controls
• Regulator expectations
• Compliance risk appetite (e.g., thresholds, escalation points)
• Penalties and potential restitution for non-compliance
• Scope of impacts

Certified Regulatory Compliance Manager
Banking Regulatory exam
Killexams : Banking Regulatory test - BingNews https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/CRCM Search results Killexams : Banking Regulatory test - BingNews https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/CRCM https://killexams.com/exam_list/Banking Killexams : Online test cheats nabbed by FINRA

Executive moves this week

From a new role to a retirement, several industry veterans are making changes

  • By: Katie Keir
  • August 5, 2022 August 5, 2022
  • 12:59

As financial conditions tighten, insolvencies rise

After plunging during the pandemic, signs of financial distress are resurfacing

How about some good news on inflation?

BMO, RBC: broad commodity price decline points to easing inflationary pressure

Canadians can’t walk the personal finance talk

Self-reported financial skills aren't backed by evidence, a CPA Canada survey finds

Fri, 15 Jul 2022 07:43:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://www.investmentexecutive.com/news/from-the-regulators/online-exam-cheats-nabbed-by-finra/
Killexams : Series 24

What Is the Series 24?

The Series 24 is an test and license entitling the holder to supervise and manage branch activities at a broker-dealer. It is also known as the General Securities Principal Qualification Examination and was designed to test the knowledge and competency of candidates aiming to become entry-level securities principals. Supervisory activities allowed after passing the test include regulatory compliance over trading and market-making activities, underwriting, and advertising.

Key Takeaways

  • The Series 24 test is taken in order to be qualified to manage branch activities.
  • FINRA details the prerequisites for obtaining a Series 24, which are multiple investment exams such as the Series 7 and Series 79.
  • The Series 24 test contains 150 scored questions.
  • Supervising general broker-dealer activities is the section of the test with the largest amount of questions.
  • It is an extremely difficult exam.

How the Series 24 Works

The Series 24 test is administered by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and covers courses such as corporate securities, real estate investment trusts (REITs), trading, customer accounts, and regulatory guidelines. In order to be eligible for a principal registration, a candidate must pass the Series 24 exam, the securities industry essentials (SIE) exam, and one of the following five representative-level qualification exams: Series 7, 57, 79, 82, or 86/87. Candidates can also pass the Series 24 and Series 16 exams but not the SIE and qualify for the research principal registration.

The Series 24 Exam

The examination contains 150 scored questions and 10 questions that are not scored, with the non-scored questions randomly distributed throughout the exam. To pass, a candidate must correctly answer at least 105 questions of the 150 scored questions. This equates to a score of 70%. The test administrator provides electronic calculators and dry-erase boards and markers. No other calculators, references, or study materials are permitted in the examination room.

Candidates have a maximum time of three hours and 45 minutes to complete the exam. A FINRA member firm or other applicable firms can register a candidate to take the test by filing a Form U4 and paying the $120 examination fee.

Special Considerations

The Series 24 content is grouped into the five main job functions that a general securities principal engages in regularly at work for a broker-dealer. Those job functions include:

  • Supervision of Registration of the Broker-Dealer and Personnel Management Activities (9 questions): This includes regulatory requirements and exemptions, differences between various registrations, hiring and registration of associated persons, and maintenance of registrations.
  • Supervision of General Broker-Dealer Activities (45 questions): This includes the development, implementation, and updating of firm policies; written supervisory procedures; and controls. It also includes supervision of the conduct of associated persons; disciplinary action; supervision of compensation; and development, evaluation, and delivery of products and services.
  • Supervision of Retail and Institutional Customer-Related Activities (32 questions): This includes supervision of new account opening and maintenance of existing accounts, as well as monitoring of speaking engagements and other public communication. In addition, it includes the review of transactions, recommendations, and account activity for proper disclosures.
  • Supervision of Trading and Market-Making Activities (32 questions): This includes supervision of order entry, routing, and execution, as well as the proper booking and settlement of trades, and the review of executions for compliance.
  • Supervision of Investment Banking and Research (32 questions): This includes the development and maintenance of policies, procedures, and controls related to investment banking activities and research. It also entails the review and approval of investor disclosures, pitch books, and marketing materials.

How Hard Is the Series 24 Exam?

The Series 24 is a very hard exam. Although there are no official pass rates or figures, a quick search will bring up forums of those who have taken and the general consensus is that it is one of the hardest financial exams and requires a serious time commitment to studying and a deep understanding on the knowledge required to achieve the required 70% passing grade.

What Is the Series 24 Pass Rate?

The pass rate for the Series 24 is not published. However, many who sit for the test consider it very difficult compared to the prerequisite exams. This is why study prep courses and FINRA itself recommend an extended period of time to prepare for the intense exam.

What Are the Requirements to Get Additional Time on the Series 24 Exam?

There is no information on the FINRA website regarding extra time for the Series 24 exam. However, it is designed and structured in a way that test takers should have plenty of time to answer all the questions and return to ones that they missed or had reservations about.

Do I Need a Series 79 If I Have a Series 24?

Yes, a Series 79 test is one of the prerequisites that must be taken before passing a Series 24 exam. You could also obtain an SIE and a Series 7, an SIE and a Series 57, an SIE and a Series 82, and an SIE and a Series 86 and 87. You could also forgo the SIE and a complement and sit for the Series 16 as a standalone prerequisite. If you have only the Series 79 and the SIE, then the principal registration you would be able to acquire would be Investment Banking Principal (BP).

The Bottom Line

The Series 24 test is a difficult test that requires substantial prerequisites before a candidate can sit for the exam. A candidate needs to be sponsored by a FINRA member or other applicable self-regulatory organization. Those who decide to pursue the test do so in order to regulate compliance for advertising, market making, trading, and underwriting.

Mon, 11 Jul 2022 16:34:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/series24.asp
Killexams : FINRA Bars Reps For Cheating on Online Qualifying Exams

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority barred two brokers from the industry after accusing them of cheating on qualification exams last year. It marks the first time the regulator brought actions against brokers for cheating on remote exams.

FINRA barred Brandon Autiero, a N.J.–based broker affiliated with Equitable Advisors, and Harris Kausar, an aspiring investment banking representative with Barclays based out of New York. The enforcement actions put test cheaters “on notice,” according to Jessica Hopper, FINRA's Enforcement Department head and executive vice president.

“Regardless of the testing environment, FINRA remains vigilant in our efforts to detect cheating and will vigorously pursue disciplinary action—including permanent bars—against any individual who cheats on qualification examinations,” she said in a statement.

According to the settlement letter for Autiero, the broker took several qualification exams in March, June, July and September 2021, and in each instance Autiero received an accommodation to take the test remotely. 

During online tests, proctors use camera-equipped computers to monitor the test process, according to FINRA. All test takers must also store personal items outside the room, and not use any devices to access the internet, but during the exams, Autiero logged online, checking with several web forums for help answering the questions. 

The allegations mirrored those against Kausar, who took a Series 79 test in December 2021 and also received accommodation for an online exam.

In settling the charges, the two brokers accepted FINRA’s findings and punishment without admitting or denying the charges. Autiero was permitted to resign from Equitable after "admitting having violated ethical standards" during a FINRA exam, according to his BrokerCheck profile

FINRA’s Securities Industry Essentials, Series 6 and Series 7 exams can all be taken in-person or remotely, while other FINRA exams can be taken remotely with permission.

FINRA-regulated firms have also called for branch exams to continue to be conducted remotely in lieu of in-person visits, arguing the industry was prepared to work with remote inspections on a permanent basis, with one Cetera compliance rep telling FINRA last year that regulators should consider conducting all regular exams remotely unless an in-person visit is essential, and that the downsides of on-site visits outweighed the benefits. 

Earlier this year, FINRA extended the rule allowing remote office inspections that had been in place throughout 2020 and 2021 throughout the end of 2022.

Wed, 13 Jul 2022 08:11:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.wealthmanagement.com/regulation-compliance/finra-bars-reps-cheating-online-qualifying-exams
Killexams : Banking agencies get deluge of feedback on CRA proposal

Stakeholders on all sides of the issues sounded off on the proposed changes to the federal redlining statute in comments to the banking agencies marshaling the changes.

Some of the nearly 360 comments came in late on Thursday, a day before the deadline imposed by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Those agencies oversee banks, and are tasked with ensuring banks do not redline, by enforcing the Community Reinvestment Act.

In the days before the deadline, trade associations preparing their comments were still “deep in the weeds,” scrambling to get their members to agree on details big and small.

In theory, agencies have to read the comments and respond publicly, especially to issues raised by multiple commenters. The agencies don’t have to heed criticisms, however.

Much of the feedback that trade associations, fair housing groups and community advocacy groups submitted had common threads. Numerous organizations criticized the agencies for not proposing to grade banks based on data about their minority lending.

The nearly 50-year old statute curiously never included language about race, although it was intended to address redlining. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition has argued that putting race in the implementation of the law would not violate the constitution.

“But regulators are wary of going anywhere near that line,” said Jesse Van Tol, CEO of NCRC.

“Above all, we are extremely disappointed to see the lack of the explicit consideration of lending by race in a lender’s CRA rating,” wrote the St. Louis Equal Housing and Community Reinvestment Alliance.

Some think that the proposed rule already addresses concerns that including race more explicitly would draw a legal challenge. The National Housing Conference, a trade association that represents mortgage lenders, was one of the few industry stakeholders that suggested the banking agencies push the boundaries a bit more.

“NHC recommends that the CRA regulation develop a process for collecting and reporting baseline data on investment and lending to people of all races,” wrote David Dworkin, the National Housing Confeence’s CEO. “This same data reporting should be used in assessing performance and establishing performance context in CRA evaluations as well.”

While the regulators did not propose using data on race in community reinvestment exams, the banking agencies floated the idea of giving community development credit for special purpose credit programs. Among commenters, there was broad support for that idea, including from the Urban Institute, fair housing groups, and numerous trade associations, including the Mortgage Bankers Association and the Housing Policy Council.

In its letter, the MBA said it was supportive of the banking agencies giving credit for special purpose credit programs.

The Housing Policy Council, which represents large bank and nonbank mortgage lenders and servicers, recommended that the agencies consider special purpose credit programs “favorably” in community reinvestment exams.

“Such a specific positive reference to SPCPs in the rule would likely encourage more banks to utilize SPCPs – a result that would benefit more LMI borrowers and neighborhoods,” wrote Ed DeMarco, president of the Housing Policy Council. Doing so would dovetail with other efforts by regulators to encourage mortgage lenders to make targeted lending programs.

The Housing Policy Council also suggested some tweaks to how CRA credit is given for loan purchases from Ginnie Mae pools, to avoid discouraging lender participation in programs backed by those securities. The trade association recommended that the banking agencies allow a loan purchased from a Ginnie Mae pool to qualify as a loan to a low- or moderate-income borrower, as long as the borrower was low- or moderate-income at the time of origination.

The MBA also recommended the banking agencies weigh retail and community development tests equally in CRA exams, rather than the proposed weights of 60% and 40%, respectively.

Multiple commenters, including HPC and MBA, asked the banking agencies to allow more time to adjust to the revisions. The proposal would provide banks a year to implement the changes.

Comments received by the agencies were not limited to those representing banks who, in theory, must pass CRA exams in order to be allowed by the regulators to grow larger. (That rarely, if ever, happens.)

Those representing nonbanks also took the opportunity to weigh in, amid the proliferation of CRA-like requirements for nonbanks at the state level. The expansion of those regulations stems, in part, from support from top Federal Reserve officials.

In 2021, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said he supported subjecting nonbanks to CRA requirements, saying, “Like activities should have like regulation.”

The Community Home Lenders Association, which represents small and mid-size nonbank mortgage lenders, in its letter to the banking agencies, said that CRA requirements for nonbanks were “inappropriate.”

The CHLA pointed out that most loans that nonbanks make are backed by federal agencies, and subject to their underwriting guidelines, loan pricing and upfront fees for borrowers. Nonbanks make up the greater share of Federal Housing Administration mortgages, which are the mortgage of choice for first-time homebuyers and borrowers of color.

The trade group also argued that nonbanks, which are not subject to the federal CRA, continue to outperform banks when it comes to minority borrowing. Their letter cites findings from the Urban Institute, that for nonbank originations, median credit scores are consistently lower, and median debt-to-income ratios are consistently higher than those of banks.

But the Urban Institute also found that, whether subject to the CRA or not, mortgage lenders overall are not keeping up with even current levels of homeownership in majority-minority areas.

In its letter to the banking agencies, the Urban Institute found that predominantly minority neighborhoods have a 10% homeownership share, but receive only 8.1% of mortgages and 5.9% of bank loans.

“In all cases, overall lending is lower than the current homeowner share, and nonbanks consistently outperform banks,” the Urban Institute wrote.

Fri, 05 Aug 2022 08:51:00 -0500 Georgia Kromrei en-US text/html https://www.housingwire.com/articles/banking-agencies-get-deluge-of-feedback-on-cra-proposal/
Killexams : Finra bars would-be brokers for cheating on online qualification exams

Finra barred two individuals from the financial industry for cheating on online qualification exams, the first enforcement actions the regulator has taken in relation to remote examinations.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. announced Wednesday that it imposed bars on Brandon Autiero, formerly associated with Equitable Advisors, and Harris Kausar, formerly associated with Barclays Capital Inc. In separate incidents, Autiero and Kausar accessed public online forums to assist with answering questions during examinations.

Finra has been offering remote exams for more than a year to accommodate social distancing concerns related to the coronavirus pandemic. Most industry qualifying exams are administered in person. Finra said it has suspended or barred 12 individuals since January 2021 who cheated or possessed unauthorized materials during in-person exams.

“Test cheaters are on notice: regardless of the testing environment, Finra remains vigilant in our efforts to detect cheating and will vigorously pursue disciplinary action — including permanent bars — against any individual who cheats on qualification examinations,” Jessica Hopper, Finra executive vice president and head of enforcement, said in a statement.

An attorney for Autiero declined to comment. An attorney for Kausar did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In settling with Finra, Autiero and Kausar accepted the regulator’s findings without admitting or denying them.

In order to become registered as securities professionals, individuals must pass exams administered by Finra covering courses that include securities products and financial regulation. The Securities Industry Essentials, Series 6 and Series 7 can be taken online or in-person through regular scheduling. Other Finra exams can be taken online by request.

Firms that help people prepare for the exams backed Finra’s enforcement moves.

“Given that we work in an industry where cheating has very severe financial consequences to firms and clients, taking action on something like a regulatory test seems reasonable and a best practice,” said Brian Marks, president of Knopman Marks Financial Training.

So much of the work in financial services is based on trust that it makes sense to begin ensuring it during qualification exams, said Jeremy Solomon, co-founder and president of Solomon test Prep.

“Trust is the key element of everything in our system,” Solomon said. “It’s great to hear Finra is enforcing these rules. It’s a positive sign for the industry, issuers, investors and everyone involved. We want a competent and honest industry.”

Autiero cheated on several occasions last year while taking the Finra Series 7 test as well as the Series 63 and 66 exams sponsored by the North American Securities Administrators Association. He became a general securities representative with Equitable Advisors in March 2021 but resigned in February 2022 after Finra began investigating him, according to the Finra settlement.

Kausar began working for Barclays in July 2021 and was attempting to become an investment banking representative. He cheated during a Finra Series 79 test in December 2021. He was terminated by Barclays in February 2022 because he didn’t pass the test in the required time frame, according to the Finra settlement.

Online exams use computers equipped with cameras and are monitored remotely by test staff, Finra said. Marks said proctors make a detailed assessment of the room where tests are taken and the computer screen of the test taker.

“It’s a very thorough screening process,” he said. “I know it’s thorough because clients complain about it.”

Solomon said he feels bad for the two people who have had their brokerage careers ended. But the situation emphasizes a point he makes to his clients about the hours of study required for qualifying exams.

“There is no shortcut,” Solomon said.

Single-stock ETFs coming soon

Wed, 13 Jul 2022 06:35:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://www.investmentnews.com/finra-bars-would-be-brokers-for-cheating-on-online-qualification-exams-224057
Killexams : New York banking regulator calls for end to certain overdraft practices

New York regulators are urging lenders to curb overdraft fees levied on consumer accounts as part of the state agency’s push to reform banking practices considered unfair and deceptive.

New guidance from the New York State Department of Financial Services, issued Tuesday, aims to set “clear expectations” about the charging of fees for nonsufficient funds and overdraft account transactions, according to a NYSDFS statement.

Eliminating the use of “improper or unfair” banking fees is a “critical component of financial health and stability,” Superintendent Adrienne Harris said in the statement. Harris added that the guidance seeks to protect the “most vulnerable consumers of banking services” — low- and moderate-income clients, people of color and immigrant communities.

The state agency addressed three fee policies in particular which regulators are seeking to end:

  • Overdraft charges when the consumer’s account shows sufficient funds at the time of transaction
  • “Overdraft protection” fees that automatically transfer funds from another account but still does not cover the transaction
  • Double-charging accounts after a merchant takes multiple attempts to collect failed transactions

The guidance is aimed at more than 50 community banks out of the 159 New York state-chartered banks as well as at 15 credit unions. Evidence of the kinds of fee practices targeted by the department was found in one or more regulatory exams of those 65 institutions, according to a source familiar with the state’s review.

The New York Bankers Association said the trade group “strongly supports” access to affordable banking services but noted that some of the new requirements in the guidance may be “technically impractical,” according to an emailed statement from association President Clare Cusack.

“This guidance has the potential to unduly disadvantage New York’s state-chartered banks since the additional disclosure and other requirements may not be consistent with those applicable to federally chartered banks,” Cusack said.

She added that the association supports New York regulators in promoting the agency’s Bank On program which provides certified accounts that do not charge overdraft fees “for the purpose of bringing underserved consumers into the banking system.”

The guidance comes amid heightened scrutiny of New York-chartered lenders’ practices. A new state law targeting overdraft fee practices took effect on Jan. 1 requiring state-chartered banks to pay checks for consumer accounts in the order they are received, or from the smallest to largest dollar amount for each business day’s transactions.

In May, Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York directed the department of financial services to study New York’s underbanked communities and households to better understand how to Strengthen access to financial services. State legislators passed a bill authorizing the agency to study and prepare a report related to overdraft fee practices.

And last month, state regulators unveiled a proposal that would create a “new fee methodology,” which would evaluate the needs of licensees and consumers who use check-cashing services.

Tue, 12 Jul 2022 06:11:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.americanbanker.com/news/new-york-banking-regulator-calls-for-end-to-certain-overdraft-practices
Killexams : NY fines Robinhood Crypto $30M for skirting banking rules

The crypto division of the financial services company Robinhood will pay a $30 million penalty to New York state for failing to comply with regulations governing money laundering and cybersecurity

ByThe Associated Press

August 02, 2022, 12:33 PM

NEW YORK -- The crypto division of the online brokerage Robinhood will pay a $30 million penalty to New York state for failing to comply with regulations governing money laundering and cybersecurity, the state's Department of Financial Services announced Tuesday.

The department said an examination of Robinhood Crypto's operations from Jan. 24, 2019, through Sept. 30, 2019, found that the company's compliance with banking regulations had not kept up with its growth.

“As its business grew, Robinhood Crypto failed to invest the proper resources and attention to develop and maintain a culture of compliance—a failure that resulted in significant violations of the Department’s anti-money laundering and cybersecurity regulations,” Adrienne A. Harris, superintendent of the state's Department of Financial Services, said in a news release.

Department of Financial Services officials said Robinhood Crypto improperly certified to the state that it was in compliance with transaction-monitoring and cybersecurity regulations despite its deficiencies in those areas. Additionally, the officials said, the company failed to provide a dedicated phone number for consumer complaints on its website, as is required.

In addition to paying the $30 million penalty, Robinhood Crypto will be required to retain an independent consultant who will evaluate the company's regulatory compliance, the officials said.

Cheryl Crumpton, associate general counsel for Robinhood Markets Inc., said in a statement, “We are pleased the settlement in principle reached last year and previously disclosed in our public filings is now final. We have made significant progress building industry-leading legal, compliance, and cybersecurity programs, and will continue to prioritize this work to best serve our customers.”

Tue, 02 Aug 2022 04:33:00 -0500 en text/html https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/ny-fines-robinhood-crypto-30m-skirting-banking-rules-87812129
Killexams : Robinhood crypto division fined $30M for skirting banking rules in New York

MENLO PARK — The crypto division of the online brokerage Robinhood will pay a $30 million penalty to New York state for failing to comply with regulations governing money laundering and cybersecurity, the state's Department of Financial Services announced Tuesday.

The department said an examination of Robinhood Crypto's operations from Jan. 24, 2019, through Sept. 30, 2019, found that the Menlo Park company's compliance with banking regulations had not kept up with its growth.

"As its business grew, Robinhood Crypto failed to invest the proper resources and attention to develop and maintain a culture of compliance—a failure that resulted in significant violations of the Department's anti-money laundering and cybersecurity regulations," Adrienne A. Harris, superintendent of the state's Department of Financial Services, said in a news release.

Department of Financial Services officials said Robinhood Crypto improperly certified to the state that it was in compliance with transaction-monitoring and cybersecurity regulations despite its deficiencies in those areas. Additionally, the officials said, the company failed to provide a dedicated phone number for consumer complaints on its website, as is required.

In addition to paying the $30 million penalty, Robinhood Crypto will be required to retain an independent consultant who will evaluate the company's regulatory compliance, the officials said.

Cheryl Crumpton, associate general counsel for Robinhood Markets Inc., said in a statement, "We are pleased the settlement in principle reached last year and previously disclosed in our public filings is now final. We have made significant progress building industry-leading legal, compliance, and cybersecurity programs, and will continue to prioritize this work to best serve our customers."