{"database": "lobbying", "table": "lobbying_activities", "rows": [[1771020, "2ba7f870-a924-48cd-a45e-e069823a4e82", "Q4", "COMMUNITY BANKERS ASSOCIATION OF ILLINOIS", 400531588, "COMMUNITY BANKERS ASSOCIATION OF ILLINOIS", 2015, "fourth_quarter", "TAX", "Community Bankers Association of Illinois (CBAI) 2015 Federal Policy Priorities (House and Senate, FDIC, OCC)\n\nCredit Union Taxation and Expansion of Powers -\nCredit unions now indistinguishable from community banks, grown to control a significant share of the banking services market.  Original business model now outdated.  Credit unions strayed from founding purpose of serving individuals of modest means and with a common bond.  Same financial services as community banks.  Federal tax-exempt status, in exchange for serving their original mission is no longer justified. Credit unions paying their fair share of income taxes.\n\nCredit unions adhering to a common bond or operating within a well-defined local community, neighborhood or rural district. \n\nCredit unions similarity to other types of mutually owned financial institutions - savings banks (SB) and savings and loans (S&L).  The exemption for SBs and S&Ls repealed by Congress in 1951 - (reason) - active competition with taxable institutions [community banks].  \n\nThe Office of Management and Budget tax expenditure analysis - tax-exemption for credit unions result in loss of tax revenues of $9.46 billion over fiscal years 2014-2018.\n\nCredit union expansion of commercial lending powers - increasing the percentage of assets cap on member business lending (MBL).  Loan growth at the expense of tax-paying community banks.  Fundamental altering the exclusive member-focused character of credit unions - a condition for their original tax exemption.  \n\nApplying Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) requirements to credit unions - same asset size distinction as banks and thrifts.  The same Call Report filing requirements for credit unions as those imposed on community banks.\n\nTax subsidy and level the playing field between credit unions and tax-paying community banks.\n\nFarm Credit System -\nExpansionist agenda of the Farm Credit System (FCS).  FCS almost the equivalent of commercial banks yet retaining the benefits of Government Sponsored Enterprise (GSE) status. Tax advantages - unfair competitive advantage. Follow narrow historic mission - abolish or be subject to taxation and oversight and regulation. \n\nNarrow founding purpose of the System to serve bona fide farmers, ranchers, young-beginning farmers, small farmers, and their farmer-owned cooperatives. \n\nSupport and cooperation of Farm Credit Administration (FCA) - FCS straying beyond its original mission and scope and engaging in inappropriate and unprecedented lending activities.  FCS significant systemic and taxpayer bail-out risks.  \n\nThe FCS (only GSE) in active competition with community banks.  Public sector (multi-billion dollar GSE) competition with the private sector (Main Street community banks).\n\nFunding and tax benefits impact on community banks.  FCS not following its narrow historical mission.  Follow narrow mission or abolish System. Abolished or taxation when exceeding a given asset threshold, lending to large borrowers, or engaging in non-farm lending activity.  \n\nFCS requirement to engage in joint rulemaking with federal banking agencies, a member of a federal banking agency on its three person board, requirement to register a class of stock with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), full disclosure as required by the SEC Act, publication of instances of illegal lending and exemptions granted, and subject to regulatory safeguards, disclosures and controls equal to community banks and housing GSEs, including CFPB oversight. \n\nCongress convening joint committee hearings to investigate the operations, supervision, risks and financial soundness of the FCS, and impact on rural community banks. \n\nTiered Regulation and Supervision for Community Banks - \nThe Independent Community Bankers of Americas Plan for Prosperity-\n\nOutsized risks taken by Wall Street mega banks during the financial crisis.  The different/modest risks posed by community banks.  Regulations not reflecting those differences.  Regulatory burden on community banks by a one-size-fits-all approach.  Disproportionate burden of banking laws and regulations on community banks.  Credit unions, Farm Credit System lenders and other non-bank financial service providers not subject to the same laws and regulations as community banks.  Unlevel playing field and a significant competitive disadvantage for community banks.\n\nIndependent Community Bankers of Americas (ICBA) Plan for Prosperity - a regulatory platform - community banks able to thrive and contribute to local economies. \n\nExcessive, redundant and costly regulations.  Regulatory accountability.  Community banks dedicating resources to promoting economic growth. Steady increase in regulations over many decades.  Regulatory threats to community banks and their communities.\n \nThe Plan for Prosperity regarding:\nBasel III original intent.\nadditional capital for small holding companies - modernize the Federal Reserves Policy Statement.\nSecurities and Exchange Commission rules.\nreforming mortgage lending.\naccountability in bank exams by providing an appeals process.\nbank oversight and examinations - targeting risks.\nannual requirement for redundant privacy notices.\nconsumer regulation - inclusive and accountable CFPB governance.\narbitrary disparate impact fair lending causes of action.\nviability of mutual banks with new charter options.\ncost-benefit analysis to justify new rules.\nred tape in small business lending - burdensome data collection.\ncommunity bank mortgage servicing.\nTreasury Assistant Secretary for Community Banks.\nsubchapter S constraints.\nfive-year loss carryback - support for lending during economic downturns.\nrisk targeting in the Volcker Rule. \n\nTiered regulatory system based on size and risk profile - banking law, rule, and regulation clearly distinguishing and appropriately regulating community banks. \n\nLegislation -\n\nS. 1484 - Financial Regulatory Improvement Act of 2015 (bank regulatory relief) (Title I - all sections) (House and Senate, FDIC, OCC)\n\nH.R. 1233 and S. 812 - CLEAR Relief Act of 2015 (tiered regulatory reform and relief for community banks) (All sections) (House and Senate, FDIC, OCC)\n\nH.R. 1188 -The Credit Union Business Job Creation Act (expand credit union member business lending cap) (All sections) (House and Senate, FDIC, OCC)\n\nComment Letters -\n\nComment Letter - House, OMB, OCC, FDIC, Federal Reserve System, Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities (Call Report regulatory reform, Call Report regulatory burden and credit unions, Agency advocacy for community banks) (FFIEC 031 and FFIEC 041)\n\nComment Letter - Federal Reserve System, FDIC, OCC (Regulator advocacy for community banks with National Credit Union Administration and Farm Credit Administration)", "Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC),Federal Reserve System,HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,Office of Management & Budget (OMB),Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC),SENATE", null, 50000, 0, 0, "2016-01-18T12:59:15.390000-05:00"]], "columns": ["id", "filing_uuid", "filing_type", "registrant_name", "registrant_id", "client_name", "filing_year", "filing_period", "issue_code", "specific_issues", "government_entities", "income_amount", "expense_amount", "is_no_activity", "is_termination", "received_date"], "primary_keys": ["id"], "primary_key_values": ["1771020"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 23.0572639266029, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}