From: Ellie Fox [mailto:efox@colonial4banking.com]
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 3:30 PM
To: regs.comments@ots.treas.gov; regs.comments@occ.treas.gov; Comments;
regs.comments@federalreserve.gov
Cc: CCB - Zwicker, Terri
Subject: EGRPRA
Dear Sir or Madam:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on attempts to reduce regulatory
burden, which would greatly reduce the resultant financial burden.
Colonial Co-operative Bank is a 70 million, mutual bank in Massachusetts. Over
the last few years, the regulatory burden placed on smaller institutions is
daunting. There seems to be no consideration given for our limited
resources. We are expected to comply and provide the same levels of
monitoring and training as billion dollar institutions.
I can confirm that there is a severe regulatory
burden with such an inequitable distribution of
responsibility. We try very hard and I think based
upon recent exams meet the challenge, but at whose
expense?
Regulations are created often with little direction on
how to comply and much less time between the final
regulation and implementation time. 3 - 6 months
is not enough; disclosures need to be re-written,
customers need to be notified, internal forms changed,
etc., With a 6 person management team
versus a 30 person compliance department, this is a real
struggle!
State laws, specifically BSA/AML and Privacy continually
conflict with Federal. We are supposed to keep
information private yet basically police our customers
for suspicious activity and report it. Another conflict
between state and federal regulation is the definition
of a MSB.
Some suggestions:
Make more of the regulations consistent between state
and federal.
Reduce record keeping requirements perhaps to match exam
periods. If you are being examined every 18
months, as is normal, and you pass the exam, why do we
need to keep everything for 5 years?
Raise the threshold on reporting.
Give more time between final regulation and
implementation.
Provide definitive answers. Often a regulator will
give an answer and then say it is their own opinion not
agency opinion. I changed my entire budget process
for one exam, only to have the next time around,
examiner fault me for the changes. The requested
actions are often preferences not
requirements.
Give better guidance on how to do it. e.g.
verifying payee's on cashier checks and money orders.
Tell us how to do this and remain service oriented?
Instead many banks stop issuing checks completley for
non-customers.
Provide a tax credit equal to the regulatory burden.
e.g., I currently calculate the costs of credit bureaus
in order to determine the charge to the customer.
Let me calculate the costs of monitoring BSA/CIF/MSB and
give me tax credits to offset those costs.
Please contact me with any questions.
Sincerely,
Eleanor (Ellie) J. Fox
President
menu item:About EGRPRA, sub menus under About EGRPRA Are:
What is EGRPRA?
Why Is EGRPRA Important?
Why Should Bankers and Consumers Comment?
The Law
menu item:Comments and recommendations, sub menus under Comments and recommendations Are:
Submit Comments & Recommendations
Read Comments & Recommendations
menu Item: Communications, sub menus under Communicatons Are:
What We Are Doing To Reduce Burden
Banker's Top Ten Issues - 2003
Press Releases
Comments, Quotes and news
Federal Register Notices
menu item Outreach events, sub menus under Outreach events are:
2003 - 2004 Map
menu item:About Agencies, sub menus under Agencies Are:
FFIEC
FDIC
FRB
OCC
OTS
NCUA