Friday, July 15, 2016

The Now Famous Risk-Based Capital Rule: One Last "Comment"...

King of Beasts?

If according to one of NCUA's most distinguished leaders: " The key to future success of NCUA requires us..." 

" be large in head and heart."

NCUA is definitely half way there!

(...and some things never change - even two years later!)


Anonymous said...

One Last "Comment"??? On RBC!

Surly you jest!~Maynard G. Krebs

Anonymous said...

Matz’ turkey tracks are all over the agency going back to 2002 when NCUA granted expanded investment authority to Corp. CUs. We all know how that bit of wisdom worked. RBC is Matz' latest error in judgment as she attempts to distract us from the fact NCUA is a very poorly run agency from a NCUSIF funding credit union perspective. Sure, NCUA wins fluff awards to help it promote a false sense of accomplishment, but the corporate CU meltdown and OIG reports tell the true story. NCUA’s multitude of risk assessment requirements are nothing more than plain bureaucracy and further distract focus on NCUA’s own incompetency.

As an example, in the spring of 2011 NCUA had its chief economist issue dire warnings to CU volunteers and management that the 10-year US Treasury would be near 4% by December, 2011. The 10-year UST ended 2011 at 1.89%. With no real authority to predict interest rates, NCUA’s “know all” attitude cost the industry tens of millions of dollars in missed investment income in 2012 – 2013 because of shortened investment maturity holdings. Three years later the 10-year is at 2.45% and NCUA continues to wield its unchecked authority to macro-manage CUs.

Shame on Andrew FCU for extending Matz industry career beyond her first illustrious stint on the NCUA Board. And, what is the link between NCUA and Andrews FCU, which also hired the former NCUA on-site WesCorp examiner-turned-WesCorp CFO that played a key role in WesCorp’s implosion.

A note to the NCUA staffer paid to decide which comments get passed on to the queen, I dare you.

Dobie Gillis

Anonymous said...

Just saw CU Times article about Ms. Matz questioning the cost of RBC. What part of 75% of the House of Representatives have questioned the RBC rule does she not get? This is a record for bi-partisan action in the House of Representatives in recent years!

Surly, this will prompt at least one more "Comment" by Jim on this Blog site.

Anonymous said...

Well, Jim, now that you've had your say on RBC, how about taking a look at the proposed changes regarding Associational Common Bonds? For a REAL treat, take a look at the automatic approvals section. Just call it a church, homeowners association, ethnic group, etc. and you don't need to see any more or ask any more questions. Heck, it'll be easier to add them to your FOM than to open an account for them [not even CIP required!].

I am amazed that they thought to include this provision in a rule change that purports to plug holes in FOM approvals for certain associations -- up to and including removing some previously approved by NCUA from existing FOMs.

Anonymous said...

Bravo to Dobie Gillis. The NCUA is brilliant and they have been consistent 100% of the time. Consistently wrong. WesCorp, USCentral, MembersUnited, etc. NCUA exam folk on site 24/7/365 with there very own Capital Market Specialists. Did they fail due to IRR? No they failed due to Credit Risk. And what is the focus today? Interest Rate Risk. Look at the NCUA OIG reviews of the failed credit unions. Credit Risk was the #1 cause of collapse. Now they direct credit unions to stay short as the 10 yr. Tresy will hit 2.0% before it ever approaches 3.0%. Sorry NCUA wrong again. Consistently wrong.
Alfred Neuman

Anonymous said...

The battle of the "spin doctors".
In this corner Nafcu with its absurd taxation impact to consumer lending "analysis" which only they believe.
In that corner, NCUA with its "fairy tales" about the cause of corporate cu failure and that the losses are all but over, it's risk based capital rule based on the "Fantasia" like nightmare fear of IRR and CUSO risk.
In the other corner is CUNA with one fairy tale after another all designed to distract attention away from their inability to get anything done.
And, in the 4th corner, all his own, THE DOCTOR of SPIN, the one and only INTERIM CEO of CUNA Bill, "let's write mother white paper that only he understands" Hample.
Question is, are credit unions happy with the funds invested in these folks and the "return to member"?
All talk, no action.