feedSubscribe to our news feeds
Archived Posts Lists

Australian Regulatory Compliance Review
Australian Technology and IP Business
Credit Union and Mutual Law
National Consumer Credit Reform
Personal Property Securities Australia
Longview Business Insights
Australian Private Health Insurers
Wills, Trusts, Super
Mutuals Resource Centre

Resources

Commonwealth legislation
Corporate Governance
Not-for-Profit links
Regulator Links

December 19, 2011

Mutual Banking Code Compliance Committee Annual Report

The Compliance Committee of the Mutual Banking Code of Practice has released its Annual Report for 2010-2011.

It is the view of the Committee that Mutuals have a natural bias towards treating their customers well. It is part of their culture and of their history. However it did identify areas for improvement including:

  • advice to members in relation to Direct Debits
  • the frequency of reporting of Code breaches; who is responsible for that reporting and to whom they are reported (e.g. management or board level).

The Committee concluded that the ‘breach’ register may still be being confused with the ‘complaints’ register for IDR and EDR purposes. Some Mutuals have advised that they have only one register in place and that this register only reports on complaints data, without the option to also report on whether there has been a breach of the Code.

Most individual breaches reported related to the categories of:

  • ‘Key Commitments’
  • ‘Privacy and Confidentiality’
  • ‘Dispute Resolution’
  • ‘Training’
  • ‘Terms and Conditions’

Print This Post Print This Post

Posted 19th December 2011 by David Jacobson in Credit unions, Mutuals

October 26, 2011

Mutuals: the quiet achievers

In APRA Chair John Laker’s speech at the Abacus Convention he described the ‘quiet achievement’ on the part of mutual ADIs as an important source of their strength, notwithstanding “unsettled times”.

He confirmed that APRA will maintain its focus on three main supervisory issues: credit standards, liquidity and funding, and governance.

In respect of funding he made the following comment on securitisation:

self-securitisation … is an arrangement under which an ADI ‘packages’ mortgage loans on its books into an instrument that can be used in repurchase transactions with the Reserve Bank of Australia. Self-securitised instruments are not intended for day-to-day funding purposes but they have proven their worth at times of acute market pressures earlier in the crisis. I mentioned at the 2009 Conference that APRA expected all large credit unions and building societies to establish self-securitisation facilities with the Reserve Bank of Australia as part of their contingency planning. Many have now done so but, to be frank, we have also had some pushback. Some have argued that existing securitisation warehouse arrangements and/or other committed facilities are an acceptable alternative. We disagree. Experience in 2008 was that such arrangements can be unreliable at the very time they are needed. Prudence dictates another instrument in the crisis management armoury.

John Laker also commented on the impact of Basel III on mutual ADIs:

Your one challenging area in Basel III, where we would like your thinking caps on, is the design of capital instruments that might be issued by mutual ADIs. Basel III requires that, to be eligible as regulatory capital, all classes of capital instruments must be capable of absorbing losses at the point of non-viability. At that point, without going into the details, capital instruments must either be converted into equity or written-off. Only the latter appears an option for mutual ADIs.

Langes can advise mutual ADIs on funding and capital arrangements as well as issues relating to becoming a mutual bank and other regulatory requirements.

Print This Post Print This Post

Posted 26th October 2011 by David Jacobson in Legal, Mutuals, Risk management

September 1, 2011

Mutual Banking Code training

In its latest Bulletin, the Code Compliance Committee which monitors the Mutual Banking Code of Practice has emphasised the need for mutuals to train staff on the requirements of the Code to ensure that staff are aware of the Code and the benefits, rights and responsibilities of Mutuals towards their members.

Whilst there is an overlap with the training obligation in ASIC Regulatory Guide 146 (RG 146), the Mutual Banking Code of Practice deals with good practice as well as legal obligations. There are also provisions in the Code that are not dealt with in the National Credit Code or the Corporations Act, such as direct debits, chargebacks, joint accounts and subsidiary cards.

The Code also extends to Small Business members or customers.

Print This Post Print This Post

Posted 1st September 2011 by David Jacobson in Mutuals

August 15, 2011

ATO’s view of Wentworth District Capital decision

The ATO has published a Decision Impact Statement on how it will administratively treat the Full Federal Court decision regarding the tax treatment of the Bendigo Bank franchise set up by Wentworth District Capital Ltd (discussed here).

The ATO’s view is that while it accepts that the facilitation of certain commercial services in certain circumstances is capable of amounting to community service purposes within the meaning of Item 2.1 of section 50-10 of ITAA 1997 as determined by the Full Federal Court, whether that will be so in any particular case is a question of fact and circumstances. In the ATO’s view the court did not go so far as to hold that every community bank will qualify as providing a community service.

Print This Post Print This Post

Posted 15th August 2011 by David Jacobson in Legal, Mutuals

May 23, 2011

The future for Australian co-operatives

In All Together Now: How Co-operatives Are Born Again as Communities Help Themselves, the Australian School of Business has profiled Australian co-operatives leading up to the International Year of Co-operatives in 2012.

The article highlights the economic and social benefits of co-operatives notwithstanding the lack of regulatory support.

Print This Post Print This Post

Posted 23rd May 2011 by David Jacobson in Mutuals

May 19, 2011

Proposed Financial Institutions Supervisory Levies for 2011-12

Treasury has published a Consultation Paper on Proposed Financial Institutions Supervisory Levies for 2011-12 seeking industry views on the proposed financial sector levies to apply for the 2011-12 financial year.

The paper discusses potential impacts of the proposal on each industry sector and institution regulated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) including ADI’s, life insurers and friendly societies, general insurers and superannuation funds. The views provided on the paper will be taken into account in the determination of the levies to apply next year.

The financial institution supervisory levies are set to cover the operational costs of APRA, and certain market integrity and consumer protection functions undertaken by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and the Australian Taxation Office (ATO). The relevant ASIC costs include the operations of the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal.

The Minister is expected to determine and announce the 2011-12 levies before the end of the current financial year.

Print This Post Print This Post

Posted 19th May 2011 by David Jacobson in Credit unions, Mutuals

May 9, 2011

Banking competition and mutuals

The Senate Economics Committee Report on Competition within the Australian banking sector contains a number of recommendations with specific relevance to mutuals:

  • Recommendation 18
    11.73 The Committee recommends that mutual financial intermediaries be allowed to refer to themselves as a ‘mutual bank’ or ‘approved banking institution’ and use terms such as ‘credit union bank’ in their name.
  • Recommendation 35
    15.18 The Committee recommends the taxation arrangements applied to bank deposits and mutual ADI deposits should be reviewed by the inquiry into the financial system.
  • Recommendation 36
    15.24 The Committee recommends that the Government require Treasury to review the GST input tax arrangements for mutual financial intermediaries having regard to the comments in the Henry Tax Review.
  • Recommendation 37
    15.33 The Committee recommends that the Government require Treasury to review the treatment of building societies and credit unions in the franking credit arrangements and report publicly on the advantages and disadvantages of various options.

The Government Senators also issued a minority report including the following:

  • Recommendation 4
    The government senators recommend the Government continues to work in developing the market for bullet RMBS as an alternative to traditional RMBS. This will help smaller lenders diversify and broaden their funding and access cheaper funding to compete more effectively.
  • Recommendation 5
    The government Senators recommend that the Government’s commitment to allow banks and mutuals to issue covered bonds should remain a priority of the Government.

    Print This Post Print This Post

    Posted 9th May 2011 by David Jacobson in Legal, Mutuals

May 3, 2011

Grameen microfinance update

In an interesting article and podcast published at Knowledge@Australian School of Business the future of the Bangladesh Grameen Bank is discussed following the removal of its Nobel Prize winning managing director and founder Muhammad Yunus.

” With more than eight million customers, Grameen has indeed flourished. The bank has lent $10.3 billion since it began operations in 1976 and has a loan recovery rate of around 97%. It has doubled the number of its offices over the past 10 years to more than 2,900 and employees to some 23,000, including more than 13,000 loan officers, nearly all women. The average loan balance per borrower is $123, with the cost per borrower over the years hovering between $8 and $13 annually. As of 2009, Grameen had $1.5 billion of assets and a return on equity of 5.64%.”

Print This Post Print This Post

Posted 3rd May 2011 by admin in Mutuals

April 5, 2011

Case note: face to face banking a community service

In Commissioner of Taxation v Wentworth District Capital Limited [2011] FCAFC 42 the Full Court of the Federal Court dismissed an appeal by the Commissioner of Taxation from the trial judge’s decision that Wentworth District Capital (WDCL) is an association established for community service purposes within the meaning of Item 2.1 of s 50-10 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) and that the whole of its income is exempt from income tax.

WDCL, a company limited by guarantee, was incorporated to manage a franchised office of Bendigo Bank in Wentworth NSW after the last major bank closed. The success of the branch has been such that the fees received by it have generated a profit.

Although it was accepted that banking services to customers of a commercial bank were not a community service, the Court decided that WDCL was within the exemption : the main or dominant purpose for which it was established was a community service…the community service purpose was the facilitation of face-to-face banking services which provided a substantial benefit to the community of Wentworth that was both real and tangible.

” WDCL was not established to help Bendigo Bank. WDCL was incorporated to provide a solution to the problem of the absence of face-to-face banking services in Wentworth. As the Commissioner accepted at trial and on appeal, the purpose of WDCL was not to provide banking services in Wentworth and it did not do so. BBL Wentworth conducted the business of banking. ..
From the outset, WDCL was established to facilitate (without profit to the company or its corporators) face-to-face banking in Wentworth by making it commercially viable for Bendigo Bank to operate in Wentworth. …The facilitation of face-to-face banking in Wentworth remained its purpose in the 2006 and 2007 years, during which there was no bank in Wentworth other than Bendigo Bank. The conduct by WDCL of the shop front operations of Bendigo Bank on a not-for-profit basis continued its purpose of facilitating the provision of banking services in Wentworth. “

Print This Post Print This Post

Posted 5th April 2011 by admin in Legal, Mutuals

February 1, 2011

Getting potential customers to try your product

I bought a new barbecue last weekend. It was an interesting experience which might have relevance for mutual credit unions and building societies.

I thought all barbecues were the same until I started my online investigations. There are different sizes and designs, features and price points.

We chose 2 to look at it in person but we decided on the one we bought when the shop had it cooking out the front. Whilst the cook spoke to us he put on a sausage and a piece of steak and before too long he presented us some steak to eat. It was great and we were sold even before we went inside to discuss details!

Did we buy the “sizzle”? No, we had a practical demonstration of the benefits of the product.

Yes, we were ready to decide on the spot and it was a low value purchase compared to a 30 year home loan.

I have been talking to mutuals about what they can do to get customers to switch from banks.

It would be good if you can get potential customers to “taste” your product. Not all loans and deposits are the same and financial institutions are not all the same.

What can you demonstrate to show you and your products have that something extra that warrants a long term relationship change? And where do you demonstrate it?

Of course most transactions can now be made online but some decisions need face to face contact.

One regional bank is offering monthly cash prizes to customers opening up deposit accounts.

What services do you have that show the mutual difference?

Mutuals which have a “bond” relationship with members have a head start.

Print This Post Print This Post

Posted 1st February 2011 by admin in Mutuals