SDBA eNews

November 23, 2022

Happy Thanksgiving from the SDBA!

The SDBA will be closed for Thanksgiving on Thursday, November 24 and Friday, November 25, so that we may spend time with family and friends. We'll re-open at 8 a.m. CT on Monday, November 28. Many thanks to our members for your investment, partnership and most importantly, your friendship, to the SDBA. 'Tis the season to give extra thanks for each and every one of our members. From your friends at the SDBA, we hope you have a blessed and happy Thanksgiving!

SDBA Announces Fitzke to Board of Directors

SDBA Board Chairman, Dave Bangasser, SVP - Chief Banking Officer, Dacotah Bank, announced on Monday that Terry Fitzke, Head of Lending for BankWest, accepted his appointment to complete the 2022-2023 term on the SDBA Board. Terry lives in Pierre and before being promoted to Head of Lending in April 2021, he was Regional President. Terry is married to Amy, and together in their blended family, they have five children: Tanner (Jamie), Travis (Sydney), Sadie (Allen), Kortney (Eric) and Kelsey (Tanner). Terry and Amy also have eight grandchildren.


Registration is now OPEN for the 2022 IRA Basic Seminar, hosted virtually via Zoom on Tuesday, December 13. This course is designed as a “Very Basic” IRA seminar as it is designed to build a solid IRA foundation. The seminar will start with the differences between a Traditional and a Roth IRA, and then discuss how to set up a new IRA and the eligibility rules to contribute to an IRA. The biggest topic for people new to IRAs to discuss is the moving of money from one financial institution to another.

Full details and registration information can be found here. Matt Dickinson of JM Consultants will lead the seminar. Dickinson has over 18 years in banking and retirement and has held many titles within his career. He has worked for companies such as Ascensus, Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo, and Frandsen Bank and Trust. On a day-to-day basis, Matt helps financial institutions gain and maintain their knowledge base to manage their IRA portfolio.

The Zoom link will go out to participants on Monday, December 12, along with any materials provided by Matt. The session will be recorded and will be sent out after the seminar concludes.

Freddie Mac Survey: One-Third of Gen Z Adults See Homeownership Obstacles

One in three Gen Z adults—those age 18 to 25—say that owning a home seems out of reach for them financially, according to a new survey fielded by Freddie Mac. That figure was up from 27% at the time of the last survey in 2019.

Among the top five hurdles Gen Zers identified were saving for a down payment (39%), not having a sufficient credit history (27%), an unstable job situation (27%), student loan debt (22%) and credit card debt (11%). The survey also found that Gen Z adults had a preference for owning a home over renting, with an overwhelming majority agreeing that owning a home provides more privacy (96%), is something to be proud of (95%) and allows for more control and independence (92%).

Reining in a Regulator Gone Rogue 

by Rob Nichols, ABA President & CEO

In an American Banker op-ed earlier this year, I called out the CFPB under the leadership of Rohit Chopra as a “regulator gone rogue.” I’m not alone in my criticism: in September, 12 Republican lawmakers took the bureau to task over what they called a “radical and highly-politicized agenda unbounded by statutory limits.”

Unfortunately, the bureau has continued to push legal boundaries on several different fronts in recent months.

First, the bureau has waged an aggressive PR campaign against so-called “junk fees”—using a term it coined to demonize the legitimate fees, including overdraft fees, that banks charge consumers for the products and services they offer. Throwing these fees in with things like concert ticket processing fees, resort fees and other surprise fees charged by retailers and hospitality businesses was a deliberate move to confuse the public about the well-disclosed fees they currently pay. (For the record, banks don’t charge resort or ticket fees, nor does the CFPB have authority to regulate those types of fees.)

Another alarming step by the Chopra bureau was its decision to update the UDAAP section of its exam manual in a way that fundamentally upends the regulatory approach to fair lending supervision and enforcement, without providing industry stakeholders or the public the opportunity to provide feedback through the notice and comment process under the Administrative Procedure Act. Instead, the CFPB chose to take a backdoor route to expand its authority—giving itself the ability to examine for alleged disparate treatment or impact across all areas of bank operations using the authorities granted by the Dodd-Frank Act under its authority to prevent “unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices.”

In reality, the CFPB’s authority to enforce anti-discrimination laws is limited to credit products. It’s clear that this move is an attempt by the bureau to set itself up as a “super-regulator” of financial practices using authority Congress did not give it.

To be clear: ABA fully supports the fair enforcement of the nation’s anti-discrimination laws. We simply believe these laws should be enforced by regulators within the boundaries set by Congress. This updated manual does not qualify.

Given that the bureau has not seen fit to rescind the manual—despite previous calls from ABA and other trade groups—we were left with no choice but to pursue legal action. ABA’s lawsuit, which was filed in late September jointly with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Longview Chamber of Commerce, the Texas Bankers Association, the Independent Bankers Association of Texas, the Texas Association of Business and the Consumer Bankers Association, alleges violations of the APA in three ways.

First, the bureau is exceeding its statutory authority outlined in Dodd-Frank, which is clear that “unfairness” under UDAAP and discrimination are distinct concepts that should not be conflated. Second, the updated manual is “arbitrary and capricious,” in violation of the APA. Finally, it violates the APA’s procedural requirements because it constitutes a legislative rule that failed to go through notice and comment.

It’s never our preference to take legal action against a regulator. And this lawsuit doesn’t mean we’ve given up on finding common ground with the bureau. In fact, on issues like the need to protect consumer data, or the need to make sure nonbanks face the same regulatory requirements as banks for similar activities, or the importance of relationship banking, our goals are very much aligned.

But when a regulator—any regulator—takes a step like this to dramatically expand its regulatory reach without authorization from Congress or any opportunity for the public to weigh in, ABA will respond on behalf of our members and the industry we represent.

Podcast: Something old, something new in payments fraud 

Something old, something new: In 2022, check fraud remains a focus of bank risk professionals, while instant P2P payments are an increasingly popular platform for scammers seeking to take advantage of consumers. With respect to the latter, consumers need to realize that “this stuff behaves like cash,” says Peter Tapling on the latest episode of the ABA Banking Journal Podcast, sponsored by Intrafi Network. That immediacy is why these platforms are attractive to both consumers and fraudsters. Click here to listen to the ABA Banking Journal Podcast.

CISA News: #StopRansomware: Hive Ransomware

Tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) and indicators of compromise (IOCs) associated with Hive ransomware variants. Click here for full details

  Compliance Alliance logo


Q: If an account has multiple Pod beneficiaries on it and one beneficiary passes before the account owner, would the remaining Pod beneficiaries will receive the funds in the account upon the death of the account holder? In other words, none of the funds would be paid to the deceased POD's heirs?

A: Estate law varies by jurisdiction but generally speaking, a POD beneficiary or a POD beneficiary’s estate only has a valid interest in account funds in the account owner predeceases them. In the event the account owner passes away and then the POD beneficiary subsequently passes away, then the POD beneficiary's estate generally has a valid interest in the account and the estate should receive the POD beneficiary’s interest. If the beneficiary predeceases the account owner, then the beneficiary generally has no interest in the account and that interest is divided between the remaining POD beneficiaries, if any.

Compliance Alliance offers a comprehensive suite of compliance management solutions. To learn how to put them to work for your bank, call (888) 353-3933 or email [email protected] and ask for our Membership Team.

For timely compliance updates, subscribe to Bankers Alliance’s email newsletters.

 SDBA eNews Archive
View past issues of the SDBA eNews

Advertising Opportunity
Learn more about sponsoring the SDBA eNews.

Contact the SDBA at 605.224.1653 or via email.