12 U.S.C. § 1846

Reservation of rights to States

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 12 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In general

No provision of this chapter shall be construed as preventing any State from exercising such powers and jurisdiction which it now has or may hereafter have with respect to companies, banks, bank holding companies, and subsidiaries thereof.

(b) State taxation authority not affected

No provision of this chapter shall be construed as affecting the authority of any State or political subdivision of any State to adopt, apply, or administer any tax or method of taxation to any bank, bank holding company, or foreign bank, or any affiliate of any bank, bank holding company, or foreign bank, to the extent that such tax or tax method is otherwise permissible by or under the Constitution of the United States or other Federal law.

(May 9, 1956, ch. 240, § 7, 70 Stat. 138; Pub. L. 100–86, title I, § 101(f), Aug. 10, 1987, 101 Stat. 563; Pub. L. 103–328, title I, § 101(b), Sept. 29, 1994, 108 Stat. 2341.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–328 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), inserted heading, and added subsec. (b).

1987—Pub. L. 100–86 substituted “No provision of this chapter shall” for “The enactment by the Congress of this chapter shall not” and inserted “companies,” before “banks,”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1994 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 103–328 effective at end of 1-year period beginning on Sept. 29, 1994, see section 101(e) of Pub. L. 103–328, set out as a note under section 1828 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 32 cases, 1962–2011 · leading case: Whitney Nat'l Bank in Jefferson Par. v. Bank of New Orleans & Trust Co., 379 U.S. 411 (1965).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Whitney Nat'l Bank in Jefferson Par. v. Bank of New Orleans & Trust Co., 379 U.S. 411 (1965). · cites it 8× “Section 7 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, 12 U. S. C. § 1846 (1958 ed.), provides: "The enactment by the Congress of this chapter shall not be construed as preventing any State from exercising such powers and jurisdiction which it now has or may hereafter have with…”

Lewis v. BT Inv. Managers, Inc., 447 U.S. 27 (1980). · cites it 3× “141 (1) "was intended to, and does, prohibit the performance of investment advisory services in Florida by non-Florida bank holding companies.” 59 Fed. Res.”

Sec. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. First W. Va. Bancorp., Inc., 277 S.E.2d 613 (W. Va. 1981). “” 2 12 U.S.C. §1846 : “The enactment by the Congress of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 shall not be construed as preventing any State from exercising such powers and jurisdiction which it now has or may hereafter have with respect to banks, bank holding companies, and…”

Owensboro Nat'l Bank v. Moore, 803 F. Supp. 24 (E.D. Ky. 1992). · cites it 3× “Section 7 of the BHCA, 12 U.S.C. § 1846 , permits the application of Ky.”

Synovus Fin. Corp. v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., Southtrust Corp., Intervenor, 952 F.2d 426 (D.C. Cir. 1992). “Indeed, if Georgia wishes affirmatively to prevent SouthTrust’s entry under Georgia law, I cannot see why the Board’s approval of the transaction is of any significance at all.”

The Com. Nat'l Bank of Little Rock v. The Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 451 F.2d 86 (8th Cir. 1971). · cites it 2× “While these statutes do not, by their terms, specifically apply to holding companies, 6 7 it is argued that a multi-bank holding company such as FABCO is, in effect, engaged in branch banking and should come under Arkansas’s branch banking restrictions.”

Zimmerman v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 264 P.3d 989 (Kan. 2011). “Section 7 of the Act ( 12 U.S.C. § 1846 ) stated: “ ‘The enactment by the Congress of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 shall not be construed as preventing any State from exercising such powers and jurisdiction which it now has or may hereafter have with respect to banks,…”

Whitney Nat'l Bank v. Bank of New Orleans & Trust Co., 323 F.2d 290 (D.C. Cir. 1963). “The Federal Bank Holding Company Act, at 12 U.S.C. § 1846 , reserved to the States such powers and jurisdiction as they had or might exercise in the future with respect to banks, bank holding companies and subsidiaries of bank holding companies and Section 3(5) of Louisiana Act…”

Grandview Bank & Trust Co. v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., Com. Bancshares, Inc., Intervenor-Respondent, 550 F.2d 415 (8th Cir. 1977). “12 U.S.C. § 1846 provides: The enactment by the Congress of this chapter shall not be construed as preventing any State from exercising such powers and jurisdiction which it now has or may hereafter have with respect to banks, bank holding companies, and subsidiaries thereof.”

Cent. Bank of Clayton v. State Banking Bd. of Missouri, 509 S.W.2d 175 (Mo. Ct. App. 1974). “That question is: if the Federal Reserve Board grants an application for acquisition of a state bank by a holding company, does the state banking agency then have the power to disapprove the plan as a violation of state law? 12 U.S.C.A. § 1846 (1969) provides that the Bank…”

Florida Ass'n of Ins. Agents, Inc. v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 591 F.2d 334 (5th Cir. 1979). “” 12 U.S.C. § 1846 (1976). 6 . The following statement contains the Board’s sole consideration of the effects of the change in Florida law: It has been suggested by NAIA that, in light of the new legislative prohibitions of the Florida statute limiting Applicants’ entry into…”

Owensboro Nat'l Bank v. Stephens, 44 F.3d 388 (6th Cir. 1994). · cites it 3× “, and section 7 of the Bank Holding Companies Act, 12 U.S.C. § 1846 , each “immunize” section 287 from preemption by § 92.”

Show all 32 citing cases →

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.