[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 126 (Thursday, July 3, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29413-29417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-12493]



========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 126 / Thursday, July 3, 2025 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 29413]]



FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

12 CFR Part 303

RIN 3064-ZA45


Statement of Policy on Bank Merger Transactions

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION: Final rescission and reinstatement of statement of policy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FDIC is taking final action to rescind the Statement of 
Policy on Bank Merger Transactions published in 2024 (2024 Statement of 
Policy) and reinstate its Statement of Policy on Bank Merger 
Transactions that was in effect prior to the 2024 Statement of Policy 
(Bank Merger Statement of Policy). The reinstated Bank Merger Statement 
of Policy will remain in effect pending the FDIC's review of all 
aspects of the regulatory framework governing the FDIC's review of 
merger transactions in connection with a future proposal to 
comprehensively revise its merger policy.

DATES: This Bank Merger Statement of Policy supersedes the 2024 
Statement of Policy, effective on August 4, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Division of Risk Management Supervision: Thomas F. Lyons, Associate 
Director of Risk Management Policy, (202) 898-6850, [email protected]; 
Ryan C. Senegal, Chief, Policy and Program Development, (980) 249-3863, 
[email protected]; George J. Small, Senior Examination Specialist, 
(347) 267-2453, [email protected]. Legal Division: Annmarie Boyd, 
Assistant General Counsel, (202) 898-3714, [email protected]; Nicholas A. 
Simons, Counsel, (202) 898-6785, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 18(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act), which 
codifies the Bank Merger Act (BMA), prohibits an insured depository 
institution (IDI) from engaging in a merger transaction except with the 
prior approval of the responsible agency.\1\ The FDIC has jurisdiction 
to act on merger transactions that solely involve IDIs in which the 
acquiring, assuming, or resulting institution is an FDIC-supervised 
institution.\2\ The FDIC also has jurisdiction to act on merger 
transactions that involve an IDI and any non-insured entity, 
notwithstanding the IDI's charter.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 12 U.S.C. 1828(c).
    \2\ 12 U.S.C. 1828(c)(2).
    \3\ 12 U.S.C. 1828(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 11, 2025, the FDIC published a request for comment \4\ in 
the Federal Register on a proposal to rescind the 2024 Statement of 
Policy issued on September 27, 2024 \5\ and to reinstate the FDIC's 
prior Bank Merger Statement of Policy, which was initially adopted in 
1998 and amended most recently in 2008.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 90 FR 11679 (Mar. 11, 2025).
    \5\ 89 FR 79125 (Sep. 27, 2024).
    \6\ See 63 FR 44761 (Aug. 20, 1998), 67 FR 48178 (Jul. 23, 
2002), 67 FR 79278 (Dec. 27, 2002), and 73 FR 8870 (Feb. 15, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Having considered the comments received, the FDIC Board of 
Directors is rescinding the 2024 Statement of Policy and reinstating 
the Bank Merger Statement of Policy as described in this Supplementary 
Information.

II. Overview of the Proposal

A. Purpose

    The FDIC proposed to rescind the 2024 Statement of Policy and 
reinstate the Bank Merger Statement of Policy due to concerns that the 
2024 Statement of Policy added considerable uncertainty to the merger 
application process and raised additional questions regarding when 
merger applications would be required.\7\ The 2024 Statement of Policy 
also deemphasized the use of the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) 
thresholds in the competitive effects analysis, which had long served 
as a predictable proxy for determining whether a proposed transaction 
is anticompetitive,\8\ and replaced those thresholds with more 
subjective criteria. In addition, the 2024 Statement of Policy placed 
an affirmative burden on applicants to demonstrate that a merger 
transaction would enable the resulting institution to better meet the 
convenience and needs of the community to be served than would 
otherwise occur in the absence of the merger, without offering any 
objective or quantifiable criteria regarding how the FDIC would 
evaluate this factor.\9\ There were also concerns that the 2024 
Statement of Policy made the FDIC's merger review process less 
transparent and predictable and left prospective applicants unclear 
about the prospects for approval and the resources and time necessary 
to complete the merger application process. Based on these concerns, in 
March of 2025, the FDIC proposed a return to its historical approach by 
seeking comment on the reinstatement of the prior Bank Merger Statement 
of Policy, which is well-understood by the public and market 
participants. Reinstatement of the Bank Merger Statement of Policy 
would serve as an interim measure while the agency develops future 
policy regarding merger transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See e.g., supra n. 5 at 89 FR 79134 (``The applicability of 
the BMA will depend on the facts and circumstances of the proposed 
transaction. In addition to transactions that combine institutions 
into a single legal entity through merger or consolidation, the 
scope of merger transactions subject to approval under the BMA 
encompasses transactions that take other forms, including purchase 
and assumption transactions or other transactions that are mergers 
in substance, and assumptions of deposits or other similar 
liabilities.'').
    \8\ See id. at 89 FR 79136.
    \9\ See id. at 89 FR 79138.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Summary of the Merger Policy Statement

    The Bank Merger Statement of Policy was first published in 1998 and 
was subsequently amended several times without public comment,\10\ most 
recently in 2008. The Bank Merger Statement of Policy being reinstated 
is essentially \11\ identical to the 2008 document. It includes a 
general introduction, followed by an overview of application 
procedures, a discussion of the FDIC's evaluation of the statutory 
factors required for consideration under the BMA,\12\ and concludes 
with a list of related considerations. The discussion of the BMA 
statutory factors addresses

[[Page 29414]]

the competitive factors, the prudential considerations related to 
financial and managerial resources and future prospects, the 
convenience and needs of the community to be served, and the 
effectiveness of each IDI involved in the proposed merger transaction 
in combatting money-laundering activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra n. 6.
    \11\ The only changes are technical edits updating a room number 
and a citation.
    \12\ Supra n. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the Bank Merger Statement of Policy does not directly 
address the BMA's statutory factor related to the risk to the stability 
of the United States banking or financial system, which was added to 
the BMA by the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010,\13\ the FDIC has articulated its 
approach to evaluating this factor in the context of merger 
transactions in the FDIC's Applications Procedures Manual.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 12 U.S.C. 1828(c)(5), as amended by Dodd-Frank Wall Street 
Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, Pub. L. 111-203, section 
604(f), 124 Stat. 1376, 1602 (2010).
    \14\ See FDIC Applications Procedures Manual, pp. 4-22--4-23, 
available at: https://www.fdic.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/pr19111a.pdf. (``In evaluating a merger application, the FDIC must 
consider the risk to the stability of the United States banking or 
financial system (Section 18(c)(5) of the FDI Act). [The FDIC] 
consider[s] both quantitative and qualitative metrics when 
evaluating a transaction's impact on financial stability. The 
following is a non-exhaustive list of quantitative metrics [the 
FDIC] consider[s]: the size of the resulting firm; the availability 
of substitute providers for any critical products and services 
offered by the resulting firm; the interconnectedness of the 
resulting firm with the banking or financial system; the extent to 
which the resulting firm contributes to the complexity of the 
financial system; and the extent of cross-border activities of the 
resulting firm. In addition to these quantitative metrics, 
qualitative factors should inform the evaluation of the financial 
stability factor. Such factors include those that are indicative of 
the relative degree of difficult in resolving the resulting firm, 
such as the opaqueness and complexity of the resulting institution's 
operations.'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary and Discussion of Comments

    The FDIC received 12 comment letters from 10 commenters on its 
proposal to rescind the 2024 Statement of Policy and reinstate the Bank 
Merger Statement of Policy. Two of the commenters sent two letters each 
writing separately first to request an extension of the comment period 
and then to discuss the proposal. Commenters included academics, 
advocacy groups, trade associations, and an individual.

A. Request for Extension of the Comment Period

    Four commenters requested an extension of the 30-day comment period 
to allow for additional time for more robust public feedback. The FDIC 
decided not to extend the comment period given the extensive 
consideration of, and public feedback on, the 2024 Statement of Policy, 
which centered on the same issues. The FDIC desires to provide greater 
clarity for applicants in a timely manner as to how the FDIC would 
consider the BMA statutory factors in the context of a merger 
application, and reinstatement of the prior Bank Merger Statement of 
Policy supports this objective as it is well-understood by the public 
and market participants.

B. Comments on the Proposal To Rescind the 2024 Statement of Policy and 
Reinstate the Bank Merger Statement of Policy

    Five commenters supported the proposed rescission of the 2024 
Statement of Policy and the reinstatement of the Bank Merger Statement 
of Policy, and five commenters were opposed. Commenters who supported 
rescission and reinstatement objected to certain aspects of the 2024 
Statement of Policy and noted IDIs' familiarity and experience with the 
Bank Merger Statement of Policy. For example, one commenter believed 
that the 2024 Statement of Policy introduced uncertainty and 
subjectivity into the merger review process that potentially deterred 
beneficial transactions and appropriate corporate reorganizations. This 
commenter believed that reinstatement of the Bank Merger Statement of 
Policy would help restore clarity and predictability for these 
transactions. Another commenter considered it a prudent measure for the 
FDIC to return to the previous, well-understood framework for reviewing 
merger transactions as an interim measure while it considered more 
comprehensive revisions to its merger policy. All five commenters in 
support of rescission and reinstatement also generally supported a 
comprehensive review of the FDIC's evaluation of merger transactions.
    Commenters who opposed the proposal generally expressed support for 
the 2024 Statement of Policy and stated that rescission would be 
regressive, counterproductive, and unnecessary. These commenters stated 
that the 2024 Statement of Policy provided more clarity regarding 
considerations that are not addressed in the Bank Merger Statement of 
Policy, including for example, the community and economic impacts of 
branch closures and the FDIC's adjudication of a merger application 
under the financial stability factor. Commenters who opposed 
reinstatement of the Bank Merger Statement of Policy also generally 
supported the 2024 Statement of Policy's treatment of the convenience 
and needs statutory factor, as well as the FDIC's expectations 
regarding public hearings for transactions where the resultant 
institution would have total assets of $50 billion or more, heightened 
financial stability standards for merger transactions where the 
resultant institution would have total assets of $100 billion or more, 
and references to community benefit agreements.
    As discussed previously in this Supplementary Information section, 
the FDIC believes that the 2024 Statement of Policy has added 
considerable uncertainty to the merger application process. 
Accordingly, and in view of the comments received in support of the 
proposal, the FDIC believes it would be appropriate and beneficial to 
the public to rescind the 2024 Statement of Policy and reinstate the 
long-standing Bank Merger Statement of Policy that is both more 
familiar to, and better understood by, key stakeholders in the merger 
application process.

C. Comments Regarding Future Review of Merger Policy

    Several commenters made recommendations to the FDIC in the context 
of its future review of the agency's merger policy, including ensuring 
closer adherence to the statutory criteria, reducing automatic bars to 
approval based on supervisory ratings alone, promoting greater 
interagency coordination, providing concrete timelines for approval, 
and improving transparency. Commenters also urged consideration of a 
streamlined application process for certain transactions based on their 
size or nature, such as internal reorganizations or transfers involving 
a small number of deposits. Other commenters recommended implementing a 
de minimis exception for mergers of small IDIs in rural markets, 
modernizing the competitive effects analysis to consider competition 
from nonbanks and financial services firms, re-evaluating how the FDIC 
utilizes Summary of Deposits data when measuring market concentration, 
and ensuring closer coordination with State regulators. These comments 
will be considered, and the FDIC will seek additional public comments, 
in connection with a future proposal to comprehensively revise merger 
policy.

IV. Administrative Law Matters

A. Executive Order 12866

    Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14215, directs 
certain agencies to assess costs and benefits of significant regulatory 
actions and to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits 
(including

[[Page 29415]]

potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, 
distributive impacts, and equity). Pursuant to section 3(f) of 
Executive Order 12866, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
within the Office of Management and Budget has determined that the 
rescission of the 2024 Statement of Policy and the reinstatement of the 
FDIC's Bank Merger Statement of Policy that was in effect prior to 2024 
is a ``significant regulatory action.''

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (PRA),\15\ the FDIC may not conduct or sponsor, and the 
respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection 
unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Bank Merger Statement of Policy does not create any new or 
revise any existing collections of information under the PRA. 
Therefore, no information collection request will be submitted to the 
OMB for review.

V. Bank Merger Statement of Policy

    The text of the Bank Merger Statement of Policy is as follows:

FDIC Statement of Policy on Bank Merger Transactions

I. Introduction

    Section 18(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 
1828(c)), popularly known as the ``Bank Merger Act,'' requires the 
prior written approval of the FDIC before any insured depository 
institution may:
    (1) Merge or consolidate with, purchase or otherwise acquire the 
assets of, or assume any deposit liabilities of, another insured 
depository institution if the resulting institution is to be a state 
nonmember bank, or
    (2) Merge or consolidate with, assume liability to pay any deposits 
or similar liabilities of, or transfer assets and deposits to, a 
noninsured bank or institution.
    Institutions undertaking one of the above described ``merger 
transactions'' must file an application with the FDIC. Transactions 
that do not involve a transfer of deposit liabilities typically do not 
require prior FDIC approval under the Bank Merger Act, unless the 
transaction involves the acquisition of all or substantially all of an 
institution's assets.
    The Bank Merger Act prohibits the FDIC from approving any proposed 
merger transaction that would result in a monopoly, or would further a 
combination or conspiracy to monopolize or to attempt to monopolize the 
business of banking in any part of the United States. Similarly, the 
Bank Merger Act prohibits the FDIC from approving a proposed merger 
transaction whose effect in any section of the country may be 
substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly, 
or which in any other manner would be in restraint of trade. An 
exception may be made in the case of a merger transaction whose effect 
would be to substantially lessen competition, tend to create a 
monopoly, or otherwise restrain trade, if the FDIC finds that the 
anticompetitive effects of the proposed transaction are clearly 
outweighed in the public interest by the probable effect of the 
transaction in meeting the convenience and needs of the community to be 
served. For example, the FDIC may approve a merger transaction to 
prevent the probable failure of one of the institutions involved.
    In every proposed merger transaction, the FDIC must also consider 
the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the 
existing and proposed institutions, the convenience and needs of the 
community to be served, and the effectiveness of each insured 
depository institution involved in the proposed merger transaction in 
combating money-laundering activities, including in overseas branches.

II. Application Procedures

    1. Application filing. Application forms and instructions may be 
obtained from the appropriate FDIC office. Completed applications and 
any other pertinent materials should be filed with the appropriate FDIC 
office. The application and related materials will be reviewed by the 
FDIC for compliance with applicable laws and FDIC rules and 
regulations. When all necessary information has been received, the 
application will be processed and a decision rendered by the FDIC.
    2. Expedited processing. Section 303.64 of the FDIC rules and 
regulations (12 CFR 303.64) provides for expedited processing, which 
the FDIC will grant to eligible applicants. In addition to the eligible 
institution criteria provided for in Sec.  303.2 (12 CFR 303.2), Sec.  
303.64 provides expedited processing criteria specifically applicable 
to proposed merger transactions.
    3. Publication of notice. The FDIC will not take final action on a 
merger application until notice of the proposed merger transaction is 
published in a newspaper or newspapers of general circulation in 
accordance with the requirements of section 18(c)(3) of the Federal 
Deposit Insurance Act. See Sec.  303.65 of the FDIC rules and 
regulations (12 CFR 303.65). The applicant must furnish evidence of 
publication of the notice to the appropriate FDIC office following 
compliance with the publication requirement. See Sec.  303.7(b) of the 
FDIC rules and regulations (12 CFR 303.7(b)).
    4. Reports on competitive factors. As required by law, the FDIC 
will request a report on the competitive factors involved in a proposed 
merger transaction from the Attorney General. This report must 
ordinarily be furnished within 30 days, and the applicant upon request 
will be given an opportunity to submit comments to the FDIC on the 
contents of the competitive factors report.
    5. Notification of the Attorney General. After the FDIC approves 
any merger transaction, the FDIC will immediately notify the Attorney 
General. Generally, unless it involves a probable failure, an emergency 
exists requiring expeditious action, or it is solely between an insured 
depository institution and one or more of its affiliates, a merger 
transaction may not be consummated until 30 calendar days after the 
date of the FDIC's approval. However, the FDIC may prescribe a 15-day 
period, provided the Attorney General concurs with the shorter period.
    6. Merger decisions available. Applicants for consent to engage in 
a merger transaction may find additional guidance in the reported bases 
for FDIC approval or denial in prior merger transaction cases compiled 
in the FDIC's annual ``Merger Decisions'' report. Reports may be 
obtained from the FDIC Public Information Center, 3501 North Fairfax 
Drive, Room E-1005, Arlington, VA 22226. Reports may also be viewed at 
https://www.fdic.gov.

III. Evaluation of Merger Applications

    The FDIC's intent and purpose is to foster and maintain a safe, 
efficient, and competitive banking system that meets the needs of the 
communities served. With these broad goals in mind, the FDIC will apply 
the specific standards outlined in this Statement of Policy when 
evaluating and acting on proposed merger transactions.

Competitive Factors

    In deciding the competitive effects of a proposed merger 
transaction, the FDIC will consider the extent of existing competition 
between and among the merging institutions, other depository 
institutions, and other providers of similar or equivalent services in 
the

[[Page 29416]]

relevant product market(s) within the relevant geographic market(s).
    1. Relevant geographic market. The relevant geographic market(s) 
includes the areas in which the offices to be acquired are located and 
the areas from which those offices derive the predominant portion of 
their loans, deposits, or other business. The relevant geographic 
market also includes the areas where existing and potential customers 
impacted by the proposed merger transaction may practically turn for 
alternative sources of banking services. In delineating the relevant 
geographic market, the FDIC will also consider the location of the 
acquiring institution's offices in relation to the offices to be 
acquired.
    2. Relevant product market. The relevant product market(s) includes 
the banking services currently offered by the merging institutions and 
to be offered by the resulting institution. In addition, the product 
market may also include the functional equivalent of such services 
offered by other types of competitors, including other depository 
institutions, securities firms, or finance companies. For example, 
share draft accounts offered by credit unions may be the functional 
equivalent of demand deposit accounts. Similarly, captive finance 
companies of automobile manufacturers may compete directly with 
depository institutions for automobile loans, and mortgage bankers may 
compete directly with depository institutions for real estate loans.
    3. Analysis of competitive effects. In its analysis of the 
competitive effects of a proposed merger transaction, the FDIC will 
focus particularly on the type and extent of competition that exists 
and that will be eliminated, reduced, or enhanced by the proposed 
merger transaction. The FDIC will also consider the competitive impact 
of providers located outside a relevant geographic market where it is 
shown that such providers individually or collectively influence 
materially the nature, pricing, or quality of services offered by the 
providers currently operating within the geographic market.
    The FDIC's analysis will focus primarily on those services that 
constitute the largest part of the businesses of the merging 
institutions. In its analysis, the FDIC will use whatever analytical 
proxies are available that reasonably reflect the dynamics of the 
market, including deposit and loan totals, the number and volume of 
transactions, contributions to net income, or other measures. 
Initially, the FDIC will focus on the respective shares of total 
deposits \16\ held by the merging institutions and the various other 
participants with offices in the relevant geographic market(s), unless 
the other participants' loan, deposit, or other business varies 
markedly from that of the merging institutions. Where it is clear, 
based on market share considerations alone, that the proposed merger 
transaction would not significantly increase concentration in an 
unconcentrated market, a favorable finding will be made on the 
competitive factor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ In many cases, total deposits will adequately serve as a 
proxy for overall share of the banking business in the relevant 
geographic market(s); however, the FDIC may also consider other 
analytical proxies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Where the market shares of the merging institutions are not clearly 
insignificant, the FDIC will also consider the degree of concentration 
within the relevant geographic market(s) using the Herfindahl-Hirschman 
Index (HHI) \17\ as a primary measure of market concentration. For 
purposes of this test, a reasonable approximation for the relevant 
geographic market(s) consisting of one or more predefined areas may be 
used. Examples of such predefined areas include counties, the Bureau of 
the Census Metropolitan-Statistical Areas (MSAs), or Rand-McNally 
Ranally Metro Areas (RMAs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The HHI is a statistical measure of market concentration 
and is also used as the principal measure of market concentration in 
the Department of Justice's Merger Guidelines. The HHI for a given 
market is calculated by squaring each individual competitor's share 
of total deposits within the market and then summing the squared 
market share products. For example, the HHI for a market with a 
single competitor would be: 100\2\ = 10,000: for a market with five 
competitors with equal market shares, the HHI would be: 20\2\ + 
20\2\ + 20\2\ + 20\2\ + 20\2\ = 2,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FDIC normally will not deny a proposed merger transaction on 
antitrust grounds (absent objection from the Department of Justice) 
where the post-merger HHI in the relevant geographic market(s) is 1,800 
points or less or, if it is more than 1,800, it reflects an increase of 
less than 200 points from the pre-merger HHI. Where a proposed merger 
transaction fails this initial concentration test, the FDIC will 
consider more closely the various competitive dynamics at work in the 
market, taking into account a variety of factors that may be especially 
relevant and important in a particular proposal, including:
     The number, size, financial strength, quality of 
management, and aggressiveness of the various participants in the 
market;
     The likelihood of new participants entering the market 
based on its attractiveness in terms of population, income levels, 
economic growth, and other features;
     Any legal impediments to entry or expansion; and
     Definite entry plans by specifically identified entities.
    In addition, the FDIC will consider the likelihood that new 
entrants might enter the market by less direct means, for example, 
electronic banking with local advertisement of the availability of such 
services. This consideration will be particularly important where there 
is evidence that the mere possibility of such entry tends to encourage 
competitive pricing and to maintain the quality of services offered by 
the existing competitors in the market.
    The FDIC will also consider the extent to which the proposed merger 
transaction likely would create a stronger, more efficient institution 
able to compete more vigorously in the relevant geographic markets.
    4. Consideration of the public interest. The FDIC will deny any 
proposed merger transaction whose overall effect likely would be to 
reduce existing competition substantially by limiting the service and 
price options available to the public in the relevant geographic 
market(s), unless the anticompetitive effects of the proposed merger 
transaction are clearly outweighed in the public interest by the 
probable effect of the transaction in meeting the convenience and needs 
of the community to be served. For this purpose, the applicant must 
show by clear and convincing evidence that any claimed public benefits 
would be both substantial and incremental and generally available to 
seekers of banking services in the relevant geographic market(s) and 
that the expected benefits cannot reasonably be achieved through other, 
less anticompetitive means.
    Where a proposed merger transaction is the least costly alternative 
to the probable failure of an insured depository institution, the FDIC 
may approve the merger transaction even if it is anticompetitive.

Prudential Factors

    The FDIC does not wish to create larger weak institutions or to 
debilitate existing institutions whose overall condition, including 
capital, management, and earnings, is generally satisfactory. 
Consequently, apart from competitive considerations, the FDIC normally 
will not approve a proposed merger transaction where the resulting 
institution would fail to meet existing capital standards, continue 
with weak or unsatisfactory management, or whose earnings prospects, 
both in terms of quantity and quality, are weak, suspect,

[[Page 29417]]

or doubtful. In assessing capital adequacy and earnings prospects, 
particular attention will be paid to the adequacy of the allowance for 
loan and lease losses. In evaluating management, the FDIC will rely to 
a great extent on the supervisory histories of the institutions 
involved and of the executive officers and directors that are proposed 
for the resultant institution. In addition, the FDIC may review the 
adequacy of management's disclosure to shareholders of the material 
aspects of the merger transaction to ensure that management has 
properly fulfilled its fiduciary duties.

Convenience and Needs Factor

    In assessing the convenience and needs of the community to be 
served, the FDIC will consider such elements as the extent to which the 
proposed merger transaction is likely to benefit the general public 
through higher lending limits, new or expanded services, reduced 
prices, increased convenience in utilizing the services and facilities 
of the resulting institution, or other means. The FDIC, as required by 
the Community Reinvestment Act, will also note and consider each 
institution's Community Reinvestment Act performance evaluation record. 
An unsatisfactory record may form the basis for denial or conditional 
approval of an application.

Anti-Money Laundering Record

    In every case, the FDIC will take into consideration the 
effectiveness of each insured depository institution involved in the 
proposed merger transaction in combating money-laundering activities, 
including in overseas branches. In this regard, the FDIC will consider 
the adequacy of each institution's programs, policies, and procedures 
relating to anti-money laundering activities; the relevant supervisory 
history of each participating institution, including their compliance 
with anti-money laundering laws and regulations; and the effectiveness 
of any corrective program outstanding. The FDIC's assessment may also 
incorporate information made available to the FDIC by the Department of 
the Treasury, other Federal or State authorities, and/or foreign 
governments. Adverse findings may warrant correction of identified 
problems before consent is granted, or the imposition of conditions. 
Significantly adverse findings in this area may form the basis for 
denial of the application.
Special Information Requirement if Applicant Is Affiliated With or Will 
Be Affiliated With an Insurance Company
    If the institution that is the subject of the application is, or 
will be, affiliated with a company engaged in insurance activities that 
is subject to supervision by a state insurance regulator, the applicant 
must submit the following information as part of its application: (1) 
the name of insurance company; (2) a description of the insurance 
activities that the company is engaged in and has plans to conduct; and 
(3) a list of each state and the lines of business in that state which 
the company holds, or will hold, an insurance license. Applicant must 
also indicate the state where the company holds a resident license or 
charter, as applicable.

IV. Related Considerations

    1. Interstate bank merger transactions. Where a proposed 
transaction is an interstate merger transaction between insured banks, 
the FDIC will consider the additional factors provided for in section 
44 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, 12 U.S.C. 1831u.
    2. Interim merger transactions. An interim institution is a state- 
or federally-chartered institution that does not operate independently, 
but exists, normally for a very short period of time, solely as a 
vehicle to accomplish a merger transaction. In cases where the 
establishment of a new or interim institution is contemplated in 
connection with a proposed merger transaction, the applicant should 
contact the FDIC to discuss any relevant deposit insurance 
requirements. In general, a merger transaction (other than a purchase 
and assumption) involving an insured depository institution and a 
federal interim depository institution will not require an application 
for deposit insurance, even if the federal interim depository 
institution will be the surviving institution.
    3. Branch closings. Where banking offices are to be closed in 
connection with the proposed merger transaction, the FDIC will review 
the merging institutions' conformance to any applicable requirements of 
section 42 of the FDI Act concerning notice of branch closings as 
reflected in the Interagency Policy Statement Concerning Branch Closing 
Notices and Policies. See 64 FR 34844 (Jun. 29, 1999).
    4. Legal fees and other expenses. The commitment to pay or payment 
of unreasonable or excessive fees and other expenses incident to an 
application reflects adversely upon the management of the applicant 
institution. The FDIC will closely review expenses for professional or 
other services rendered by present or prospective board members, major 
shareholders, or other insiders for any indication of self-dealing to 
the detriment of the institution. As a matter of practice, the FDIC 
expects full disclosure to all directors and shareholders of any 
arrangement with an insider. In no case will the FDIC approve an 
application where the payment of a fee, in whole or in part, is 
contingent upon any act or forbearance by the FDIC or by any other 
federal or state agency or official.
    5. Trade names. Where an acquired bank or branch is to be operated 
under a different trade name than the acquiring bank, the FDIC will 
review the adequacy of the steps taken to minimize the potential for 
customer confusion about deposit insurance coverage. Applicants may 
refer to the Interagency Statement on Branch Names for additional 
guidance. See FDIC, Financial Institution Letter, 46-98 (May 1, 1998).

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

    By order of the Board of Directors.

    Dated at Washington, DC, on May 20, 2025.
Jennifer M. Jones,
Deputy Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-12493 Filed 7-2-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P