�౦��Ϸ����

This document supersedes the IDI Resolution Planning Rule Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) document issued by the �౦��Ϸ���� on December 17, 2024. 

Below are answers to some of the most common questions about the IDI resolution planning rule. These responses are provided by �౦��Ϸ���� staff and are not formal opinions of, and are not binding on, the �౦��Ϸ���� Board. If you have questions that are not addressed here, please contact ResolutionPlanning@fdic.gov.

April 18, 2025

Credibility Findings

NEW

Question: How does the �౦��Ϸ���� expect to apply the credibility standard and establish findings upon reviewing submissions? 

Answer: �౦��Ϸ���� staff will not recommend findings under paragraph (f)(1)(i) of the rule related to the credibility of the identified strategy. 

With respect to paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of the rule related to the information and analysis provided in the submission, �౦��Ϸ���� staff expects to focus its review on the quality and thoroughness of the submission, rather than a comprehensive verification of capabilities or evaluation of projections.  A submission that is responsive to each of the content requirements would be unlikely to result in material weaknesses or significant findings.

Finally, the �౦��Ϸ���� does not expect to make credibility determinations with respect to each submission.  Rather, the �౦��Ϸ���� will only make a credibility determination if a submission is determined to be not credible.

Identified Strategy

REVISED

Question: Can the �౦��Ϸ���� provide additional clarity regarding its expectations for the identified strategy for group A CIDIs? 

Answer: The �౦��Ϸ���� has waived the content requirement in paragraph (d)(1)(ii) to utilize the formation and stabilization of a bridge depository institution as the identified strategy and the content requirement in paragraph (d)(1)(iii) that the identified strategy include meaningful optionality.  Rather than focusing filers’ strategic resolution analysis on a prescribed bridge bank strategy, the �౦��Ϸ���� is requesting that filers describe the potential suitable resolution strategy or strategies that reasonably could be executed by the �౦��Ϸ����.  Filers may submit a single identified strategy or multiple strategies that might be suitable in different circumstances.  For instance, filers could provide a short discussion of a bridge bank strategy and how the CIDI could be sold in a whole bank sale.  While the description of the strategy or strategies should include the key elements involved, the �౦��Ϸ���� is not requesting filers to provide a lengthy narrative.  The submission will provide an opportunity under the rule for the �౦��Ϸ���� and the CIDI to discuss possible resolution strategy options.  

Failure Scenario

REVISED

Question: Can the �౦��Ϸ���� provide further context regarding the expectations for a group A CIDI’s failure scenario? 

Answer: The �౦��Ϸ���� has waived the content requirement in paragraph (d)(2) for failure scenario.  

Critical Services

UNCHANGED

Question: To be considered a critical service per the rule, does the service need to be critical to daily operations, support the identified strategy, or both?

Answer: Critical services include shared and outsourced services and include all services that are critical to daily operations including, but not limited to, back-office services and client-facing services, and, in the case of a group A CIDI, support the identified strategy. Critical services also include all services and operations that are necessary to continue any critical operation conducted by the CIDI that has been included in the most recent resolution plan of the CIDI’s parent company submitted pursuant to Title I of the Dodd-Frank Act. Critical services are broadly defined to include services that are provided by a subsidiary, parent, or parent affiliate (including those that are ultimately provided by a third party).

MIS/Critical Services Support

UNCHANGED

Question: What is the relationship between the rule’s requirements for management information systems (MIS) and the definition of critical services support? Should MIS be thought of as a subset of critical services support?

Answer: There is a significant amount of overlap between the information required for key MIS and for critical services support. Filers can include key MIS as a critical service and include it with the description of critical services and critical services support content as long as all required MIS content is included in the submission. Although the rule does not establish benchmarks or standards for identification of “key” MIS, it identifies systems and applications for risk management, accounting, and financial and regulatory reporting, as well as those used to provide the information required in the submission, as examples to provide context for this requirement. The goal of the requirement is to ensure that the �౦��Ϸ���� has the information described with respect to systems and applications that it would need to access in resolution. The same information does not need to be provided twice. Clear cross-referencing of the same information is acceptable so long as it is accompanied by appropriate context. 

Key Personnel 

REVISED

Question: How wide is the definition of key personnel?  How are key personnel and critical services related?  What is the relationship between identification of key personnel and development of retention plans?  

Answer: The term key personnel means personnel tasked with an essential role in support of a core business line, franchise component, or critical service, or having a function, responsibility, or knowledge that may be significant to the �౦��Ϸ����’s resolution of the CIDI. Key personnel may be employed by the CIDI, a CIDI subsidiary, the parent company, a parent company affiliate, or a third party. The list of key personnel may include a large proportion of staff, but we would expect it would not include all personnel. Individuals who do not have specialized skills, knowledge, or relationships, and who can be easily replaced, are not key personnel.  A list of managers is not sufficient to describe key personnel. Key personnel include, but are not limited to, staff that perform functions like client relationships and sales. 

Franchise Components, Divestiture Options, and Material Asset Portfolios

REVISED

Question: Can the �౦��Ϸ���� provide direction on the distinction among franchise components, material asset portfolios, and divestiture options?  Can the �౦��Ϸ���� provide further direction with respect to the identification of franchise components, in terms of size and separability of franchise components?  If the sale of a business unit or portfolio diminishes the remaining franchise value, should these items be identified as franchise components?  

Answer: Franchise components that meet the definition in the rule should be identified by all group A CIDIs. The concept of divestiture options only arises in connection with resolution strategies that involve multiple acquirer exits and would apply, if at all, only to group A CIDIs. Material asset portfolios that meet the definition in the rule should be identified by all group A CIDIs and group B CIDIs.

Franchise Components:  The �౦��Ϸ���� is asking group A CIDIs to provide information and analysis on existing business segments, regional branch networks, major assets, material asset portfolios, or other key components of a CIDI’s franchise that meet the rule’s definition of franchise components.  Key characteristics of franchise components are that they are currently separable and that the CIDI can market them in a timely manner in resolution.  This means that franchise components should have a readily definable perimeter that supports prompt marketing and closing on the sale.  The goal is to provide marketing optionality through identifying options that can be offered separately either during failure weekend or following a short bridge bank period and, potentially, to reduce the size of the IDI franchise so as to increase competitive bidding. 

Franchise components represent options that are readily executable currently, rather than options which would require significant restructuring or which are speculative or merely conceptual.  Franchise components should be identified in their current states and there is no expectation to identify options that might be available in the future.

Divestiture options: Divestiture options are saleable components that are part of a multiple acquirer exit strategy that may require restructuring, or present greater obstacles, and require a longer bridge bank period than for the sale of franchise components. For example, a divestiture option might be a sale of a line of business, such as a credit card operation that is not housed in a single subsidiary and shares systems, personnel, and operations with other businesses in the bank. It is possible that one or more material asset portfolios or franchise components are sold before or at exit or might be included in a larger divestiture option considered in a multiple acquirer exit strategy.

Material asset portfolios: Material asset portfolios are all pools or portfolios of assets, such as loans or securities, that may be sold by the bridge depository institution or the receivership and are significant in terms of income or value. Material asset portfolio information provides a breakdown of significant asset classes regardless of whether or not they are identified as franchise components or included in divestiture options, and as such is not necessarily connected with a particular resolution strategy.

Question: What are the �౦��Ϸ����’s expectations for franchise components for group B CIDIs given the different overall requirements for these filers?

Answer: As noted in the preamble to the rule, group B CIDIs were exempted from discussing certain portions of the franchise component content requirements, due to the potential for required discussion of resolution strategies, which are not required in group B CIDI informational filings. Therefore, the �౦��Ϸ���� has waived the franchise component content requirements in paragraph (d)(10)(i), (ii), and (iii).   However, this waiver does exempt franchise component elements from every provision of the informational filing and interim supplement. In other words, group B CIDIs may disregard the phrase “franchise components.” 

Valuation

REVISED

Question: Should economic effects of the CIDI’s failure be aligned with the bank’s failure scenario? 

Answer: The �౦��Ϸ���� has waived the content requirement in paragraph (d)(12)(ii)(A) and (iii), which require quantitative analysis. Filers are still required to provide a qualitative description under paragraph (d)(12)(ii)(B) of the approaches the CIDI would employ for determining the values of the franchise components and the IDI franchise as a whole, and an explanation as to why those approaches are appropriate.  The rule allows the CIDI to offer the methodology best suited to the valuation being conducted and the nature of the CIDI’s business.  

Economic Effects

REVISED

Question: Should economic effects of the CIDI’s failure be aligned with the bank’s failure scenario? 

Answer: The “economic effects of resolution” content requirement is intended to provide the �౦��Ϸ���� with a better understanding of the role of the CIDI in the markets in which it operates.

Accordingly, the rule requires every CIDI to identify the activities of the CIDI that are material to a geographic area or region in the United States, a business sector or product line in that geographic area or region or nationally, or to other financial institutions.  Given that the �౦��Ϸ���� would seek to resolve a CIDI in a way that minimizes the disruptive impact of the resolution to the extent possible, the �౦��Ϸ���� will use this content requirement to build awareness of the CIDI’s activities that are most likely to have significant disruptive effects if terminated in resolution, such as where a CIDI provides a unique function or is a dominant provider of a particular service. However, out of recognition that the requirement that the CIDI provide “mitigants” to the economic effects of its failure could involve a speculative assessment of impacts on and behavior of third parties, the �౦��Ϸ���� is waiving the second sentence of the “economic effects of resolution” content requirement under paragraph (d)(19)(iii).

Digital Services and Electronic Platforms

NEW

Question: What types of digital services should filers describe in their submissions?  How should filers think about digital services and the relationship to content requirements for management information systems and other content requirements?

Answer: As noted in the preamble to the rule, the digital services that CIDIs provide to customers and the electronic platforms that support these services is a new and evolving area of banking.  For purposes of the initial submission, the �౦��Ϸ���� is only expecting filers to describe unique digital services and electronic platforms with low substitutability that might result in customer loyalty.  

Communications Playbook

REVISED

Question: In the case of a resolution plan submitted by a group A CIDI that includes an identified strategy, should the communications playbook be specific to the identified strategy?  

Answer: The communications playbook content is required in all full resolution submissions, including informational filings as well as resolution plans. The communications playbook is not dependent on a particular strategy. It must describe the CIDI’s current communications capabilities and must include the elements specified in the rule. The playbook information should be applicable to any resolution scenario or strategy. 

CIDI Assessment of the Full Resolution Submission

NEW

Question:  What are the �౦��Ϸ����’s expectations for CIDIs’ capabilities testing and assurance completed by the full resolution submission date? 

Answer: The rule does not require CIDIs to have a self-assessment or capabilities testing framework.  The rule only requires that full resolution submissions subsequent to the initial full resolution submission describe the nature, extent, and results of contingency planning or similar exercise conducted by the CIDI since the most recent full resolution submission to assess the viability of the CIDI’s resolution strategy or strategies (if required) or improve any capabilities described in the full resolution submission. 

Interim Supplement

REVISED

Question: Please explain the expectations for CIDIs that are required to file interim supplements. 

Answer: For interim supplements the �౦��Ϸ���� has waived the following interim supplement content requirements:

• 12 CFR § 360.10(e)(2)(vii), content related to Franchise components; for group B CIDIs, franchise component elements of the remaining content requirements are also waived
• 12 CFR § 360.10(e)(2)(ix), content related to Off-balance sheet exposures 
• 12 CFR § 360.10(e)(2)(xi), content related to Payment, clearing, and settlement 
• 12 CFR § 360.10(e)(2)(xii), content related to Capital structure; funding sources 
• 12 CFR § 360.10(e)(2)(xiii), content related to Cross-border elements 
• 12 CFR § 360.10(e)(2)(xiv), content related to Management information systems; software licenses; intellectual property 

Engagement

REVISED

Question: Can the �౦��Ϸ���� provide insight into the scope and timing of engagement?

Answer: Aside from informal communications between the �౦��Ϸ���� and filers (e.g., conversations or emails as part of the normal course of the submission review), the �౦��Ϸ���� plans to provide at least three months’ advance notice before conducting engagement with a CIDI, but may shorten this period in certain exigent circumstances or to better coordinate with supervisory examination schedules. Engagement can take a variety of forms, such as a scheduled conference call or in-person meeting, and the �౦��Ϸ���� expects to provide the CIDI with the scope of topics and any information needs in advance of conducting the engagement.  Engagement will focus on resolution topics to inform the �౦��Ϸ����’s own resolution planning and is meant to allow the �౦��Ϸ���� to gain additional context around matters in the submissions.  Engagement may indicate areas of particular interest for a given CIDI or where further explanation would be helpful in future submissions.  Aside from informal communications mentioned above, the �౦��Ϸ���� expects to conduct engagement once with each triennial filer per submission cycle, unless there are exigent circumstances warranting additional engagement.  

Capabilities Testing

REVISED

Question: Can the �౦��Ϸ���� provide insight into the scope and timing of its capabilities testing program?  How often will these tests be conducted?

Answer: The �౦��Ϸ���� will not conduct capabilities testing prior to 2026. 

For a group A CIDI’s initial submission cycle, we will perform a horizontal test of its capabilities to establish and populate a virtual data room with information to support the ability of the �౦��Ϸ���� to market and execute a timely sale or disposition of the IDI franchise. The information should be appropriate for a buyer to conduct due diligence for a timely sale or disposition of the IDI franchise and be sufficient to permit a bidder to provide a competitive bid on the IDI franchise. 

The �౦��Ϸ���� expects to conduct horizontal testing once with each triennial filer per submission cycle. 

The scope and extent of testing for biennial filers will be considered in coordination with capabilities tests performed in connection with resolution plans submitted pursuant to Title I of the Dodd-Frank Act.

Financial Information Date

QUESTION REVISED; ANSWER IS UNCHANGED

Question: What is the as-of date that filers should use for financial data and other submission information? 

Answer: Per (g)(1) of the rule, the submission must, to the greatest extent possible, use financial information as of the most recent fiscal year-end for which the CIDI has financial statements or, if the use of financial information as of a more recent date as of which the CIDI has financial statements would more accurately reflect the operations of the CIDI on the date of the submission, financial information as of that more recent date.

Changes Since Prior Submissions

NEW

Question: How should CIDIs approach content requirements related to summarizing changes since the last submission? 

Answer: In several instances, the rule requires the CIDI to report changes that have occurred since the previous full resolution submission in the current submission. These include the interim supplement’s material change requirements ((e)(2)(i) and (ii)); resolution plan Executive Summary requirements ((d)(3)(iii)-(v)); and informational filing material change requirements (d).  CIDIs are not expected to address such changes in their initial full resolution submissions. Similarly, CIDIs that will file interim supplements in 2025 are not expected to address such changes. 

Submission Format

UNCHANGED

Question: Does the �౦��Ϸ���� have a format preference for appendices versus information contained within the submissions? 

Answer: When providing statistical information, such as payment, clearing, and settlement (PCS) activity value and volume information or QFC exposures, it is preferable to include this information in a table. In addition, we welcome filers to submit this information in a spreadsheet format (e.g., Excel) as an appendix to the submission. Regarding narrative, such as playbooks or procedures manuals, for ease of review, it is most helpful for the �౦��Ϸ���� that the CIDI include this information in a self-contained manner within a specific section of the submission. It is also acceptable to provide information such as playbooks or procedures manuals as an appendix to the submission. 

Rule Applicability – Asset Thresholds

UNCHANGED

Question: What are the total asset thresholds that determine when a bank becomes a CIDI and when should new group B CIDIs expect to be notified regarding the date their initial full resolution submission is due?

Answer: The rule applies to all CIDIs with at least $50 billion in total assets, based upon the average of total assets reported over the four most recent Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income. Once a bank crosses this threshold, the �౦��Ϸ���� will provide notification of the date the bank’s initial full resolution submission is due, which will be no earlier than 270 days from the date it becomes a CIDI. 

Non-Deposit Claims

NEW

Question: What information does the �౦��Ϸ���� require in the submission regarding non-deposit claims?

Answer: The �౦��Ϸ���� is waiving the content requirement in paragraph (d) (20) as it believes that the most critical elements of the information needed to administer non-deposit claims in a failed bank resolution can be obtained in other requirements or through supervisory channels.