12 C.F.R. § 303.244

Golden parachute and severance plan payments

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Scope. Pursuant to section 18(k) of the FDI Act (12 U.S.C. 1828(k)) and part 359 of this chapter, an insured depository institution or depository institution holding company may not make golden parachute payments or excess nondiscriminatory severance plan payments unless the depository institution or holding company obtains permission to make such payments in accordance with the rules contained in part 359 of this chapter. This section contains the procedures to file for the FDIC's consent when such consent is necessary under part 359 of this chapter.

(1) Golden parachute payments. A troubled insured depository institution or a troubled depository institution holding company is prohibited from making golden parachute payments (as defined in § 359.1(f)(1) of this chapter) unless it obtains the consent of the appropriate federal banking agency and the written concurrence of the FDIC. Therefore, in the case of golden parachute payments, the procedures in this section apply to all troubled insured depository institutions and troubled depository institution holding companies.

(2) Excess nondiscriminatory severance plan payments. In the case of excess nondiscriminatory severance plan payments as provided by § 359.1(f)(2)(v) of this chapter, the FDIC's consent is necessary for state nonmember banks that meet the criteria set forth in § 359.1(f)(1)(ii) of this chapter. In addition, the FDIC's consent is required for all insured depository institutions or depository institution holding companies that meet the same criteria and seek to make payments in excess of the 12-month amount specified in § 359.1(f)(2)(v).

(b) Where to file. Applicants shall submit a letter application to the appropriate FDIC regional director.

(1) The reasons why the applicant seeks to make the payment;

(2) An identification of the institution-affiliated party who will receive the payment;

(3) A copy of any contract or agreement regarding the subject matter of the filing;

(4) The cost of the proposed payment and its impact on the institution's capital and earnings;

(5) The reasons why the consent to the payment should be granted; and

(6) Certification and documentation as to each of the points cited in § 359.4(a)(4).

(d) Additional information. The FDIC may request additional information at any time during processing of the filing.

(e) Processing. The FDIC will provide the applicant with a subsequent written notification of the final action taken as soon as the decision is rendered.

[67 FR 79247, Dec. 27, 2002, as amended at 68 FR 50461, Aug. 21, 2003]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2012–2023 · leading case: F. Bauer v. FDIC, 38 F.4th 1114 (D.C. Cir. 2022).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

F. Bauer v. FDIC, 38 F.4th 1114 (D.C. Cir. 2022). · cites it 9× “12 C.F.R. § 303.244 (c)(4). It does not constrain the FDIC’s authority to act.”

Jerry Von Rohr v. Reliance Bank, 826 F.3d 1046 (8th Cir. 2016). “” 12 C.F.R. § 303.244 (c)(4). However, the amount sought is specified in his complaint, and details on the bank's finances are publicly available.”

Daniel Wollschlager v. FDIC, 992 F.3d 574 (6th Cir. 2021). · cites it 2× “12 C.F.R. § 303.244 (a). If a covered company wants to make a payment, including agreements to make payments, it must submit a letter to the FDIC and receive its approval.”

Wmi Liquidating Trust v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 110 F. Supp. 3d 44 (D.D.C. 2015). · cites it 2× “4 (a)(4); see also 12 C.F.R. § 303.244 (c)(6) (applying for golden parachute payments entails “[cjertification and documentation as to each of the points cited in § 359.”

Mountain Heritage Bank v. Rogers, 728 S.E.2d 914 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “The Bank submitted an application to the FDIC regional director, requesting consent for payment of the golden parachute payment in accordance with 12 CFR § 303.244 (b), (c). The FDIC regional director returned the Bank’s application, finding that it failed to meet the minimum…”

C.Bruce Batten v. Cmty. Trust & Banking Co. - Dissent in Part (Tenn. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “If an exception is deemed applicable and the severance benefits are not a golden parachute, then there is no reason to seek approval under the provisions of 12 C.F.R. § 303.244 . The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“the FDIA”) authorizes FDIC to prescribe regulations pertaining…”

Mountain Heritage Bank v. Jerry Rogers (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3× “The Bank submitted an application to the FDIC regional director, requesting consent for payment of the golden parachute payment in accordance with 12 C.F.R. § 303.244 (b), (c). The FDIC regional director returned the Bank’s application, finding that it failed to meet the minimum…”

BBX Capital v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. (11th Cir. 2020). “§ 1813 (q)(3)(F); 12 C.F.R. §§ 303.244 , 359.4(a)(1), 359.6.”

Bauer v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. (D.D.C. 2023). “After the parties cross-moved for summary judgment, the Court requested supplemental briefing on "[w ]hether the FDIC acted inconsistently with 12 C.F.R. § 303.244 by issuing a decision about hypothetical damages [or settlement] payments.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.