Orders issued under Bank Holding Company Act - Legal Developments - Allied Irish Banks P.L.C. to acquire share of M&T's subsidiary banks

Federal Reserve Bulletin,  May, 2003  by Robert DeV. Frierson

• E-mail
• Print
• Link

(30.) Before the review period, Trust Company's Pennsylvania branches operated in the Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazleton MSA. After the merger with Keystone Financial Bank, National Association, Trust Company's Pennsylvania assessment areas for the review period consisted of the Pennsylvania portions of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD CMSA; the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazleton, Altoona, State College, Reading, York, Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, and Williamsport MSAs, in Pennsylvania; a portion of the Lancaster MSA, in Pennsylvania; and Adams, Bedford, Bradford, Clearfield, Clinton, Franklin, Huntingdon, Monroe, Montour, Northumberland, Schuylkill, Snyder, Sullivan, Tioga, and Union Counties.

(31.) The 2001 Evaluation covered a review period of January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2000.

(32.) The denial disparity ratio compares the denial rate for minority loan applicants with that for nonminority applicants. The Board reviewed the 2000 and 2001 HMDA data for Trust Company and its affiliates in the following MSAs: Buffalo, New York City, and Nassau-Suffolk, New York; Philadelphia and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; and Baltimore, Maryland. The Board's review included the HMDA data for M&T Mortgage Corporation and M&T Real Estate, Inc.

(33.) The data indicate that the percentages of Trust Company's total HMDA-reportable loans to minorities were not markedly below the percentages for the aggregate lenders in the three MSAs in which Trust Company lagged those lenders.

(34.) The data, for example, do not account for the possibility that an institution's outreach efforts may attract a larger proportion of marginally qualified applicants than other institutions attract and do not provide a basis for an independent assessment of whether an applicant who was denied credit was, in fact, creditworthy. Credit history problems and excessive debt levels relative to income (reasons most frequently cited for a credit denial) are not available from HMDA data.

(35.) See 12 C.F.R. 225.28(b)(1), (3), (6), (11), and (14).

(36.) 12 U.S.C. [section] 1843(j)(2)(A).

(37.) These investments are in Compania La Proa, Ltd., George Town, Cayman Islands, and Bemberg Industrial, S.A., Buenos Aires, Argentina.

(38.) One commenter suggested, particularly in light of the 2000 Evaluation, that the Board condition its approval of the proposal on a requirement that M&T commit to keep the branches Trust Company operates in LMI neighborhoods in the New York City area open for ten years and open tire new branches there within the next two years. As previously noted, the 2002 Evaluation rated Trust Company "outstanding" both in the delivery of retail and community development services in all assessment areas and for its performance on the service test in the New York CMSA. See also discussion in footnote 29.

(39.) One commenter requested that the Board extend the comment period on the proposal. The Board has accumulated a significant record in this case, including reports of examination, supervisory information, public reports and information, and considerable public comment. In the Board's view, commenters have had ample opportunity to submit their views and, in fact, they have provided substantial written submissions that have been considered carefully by the Board in acting on the proposal. Moreover, the BHC Act and Regulation Y require the Board to act on proposals submitted under those provisions within certain time periods. 12 U.S.C. [subsection] 1842(b) and 1843(j)(1); 12 C.F.R. 225.15(d) and 225.24(d). Based on a review of all the facts of record, the Board has concluded that the record in this case is sufficient to warrant Board action at this time and that an extension of the comment period is not warranted.