speeches · June 19, 1961
Regional President Speech
Monroe Kimbrel · President
FEDERAL BANKING LEGISLATION
Address by M. Monroe Kimbrel, Chairman of the Federal
Legislative Committee, The American Bankers Association,
and Chairman of the Board, First National Bank, Thomson,
Georgia, before the Wisconsin Bankers Association,
The Hotel Schroeder, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
June 20, 1961
The first hundred days of the Kennedy Administration, a period which
expired at the end of April, was essentially a sizing-up period. It was, to a
large extent, the fthoneymoon,n which had been predicted by many observers of the
Washington scene.
But it was also a sparring period - a time when Congress was testing
out the new Administration and vice versa. While this mutual probing through
out the length of a Congressional session never really ends, we could begin to
see a pattern emerging about a month and a half ago. President Kennedy had
gained the upper hand, at least temporarily, in the historical struggle between
the legislative and executive branches of government.
His legislative recommendations have made noticable progress toward
enactment and most of the sixteen priority measures which he asked for in Janu
ary stand a fairly good chance of becoming law before the 87th Congress adjourns.
These proposals, however, are not revolutionary and their treatment
by Congress reflects two things - one, the initial courtesies extended to a new
President, and two, the fact that Mr. Kennedy has a majority of his party in
both houses. Up until June 15, the President had sent Congress some fifty bills
for new legislation and seven reorganizations plans. In this same period, Congress
passed forty-five measures which have been signed into law by the President. But
only eight of the forty-five have dealt with major Presidential proposals.
They cover Federal aid to depressed areas, a minimum wage increase, two
bills on temporary unemployment insurance extension, and four others which do not
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2
- -
affect banking in any way. The other thirty-seven varieties of legislation
which Congress has passed thus far are principally Government housekeeping opera
tions, the extension of laws about to expire, or minor amendments to other laws.
The intriguing questions now are - when will the ’’honeymoon" end, and
how much of a break, if any, will Congress make with the Chief Executive? Still on
the calendar are some very controversial issues which could arouse Congressional
resistance® Among these ares tax revision proposals, Federal aid to education,
Social Security liberalization, omnibus farm, housing, and foreign aid bills, the
Peace Corps, and creation of a new Department of Urban Affairs.
If the present pattern does not change in the next few months, these pro
posals should fare pretty well. But, if Congress departs from the pattern, some of
the programs will be in for trouble»
Commercial banking is somewhere in the middle of this minor dilemma as
far as these legislative proposals are concerned.
Here’s why: On the one hand The American Bankers Association stands in
opposition to some of the remaining measures, either in part or in total. These
include withholding on dividends and interest and certain features of the housing
and farm bills which are high on the President’s list. There are other bills, not
on the priority list but having Administration support, about which the A.B.A. has
many reservations. Among these are the Douglas Disclosure bill, a bill increasing
the power of the Secretary of Labor under the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure
Act, and an unlimited extension of the Federally aided student loan program. A
Congressional resurgence would be very helpful to us in connection with all of
these proposals.
On the other horn of the dilemma, we do have the Administration’s
support for our position on the tax status of savings and loan associations and
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 3 -
mutual savings banks, and we hope that its weight will continue to bear on this
issue.
I wish I could report that the Treasury Departments recommendations on
■fete tax-free, 12 per cent bad debt reserve presently accorded these institutions
have been sent to Congress. But at this point they have not.
Treasury officials are working diligently to have their proposals ready
so that hearings can be held in this session of Congress. The proposals will im
plement President Kennedy’s recommendation for a review of the tax deductible
reserve provisions presently accorded private savings and lending institutions,
and the remedial legislation suggested by him.
In the meantime, the Harrison and Curtis bills remain pending in the
House Ways and Means Committee. These measures would simply repeal the 12 per
cent bad debt reserve provision in existing law, making savings and loan associa
tions and mutual savings banks go to the Treasury for a determination of their
bad debt reserve as all other businesses are required to do. Whether this approach
will be contained in the Treasury's recommendations is anybody’s guess.
The Ways and Means Committee is currently holding executive sessions to
consider the other parts of the President's tax program. When these have concluded,
and if the tax uniformity recommendations are transmitted within a reasonable period
of time, Chairman Wilbur Mills will undoubtedly reopen the hearings.
By that time we will be well along in the session with possibly a little
more than two months remaining before adjournment. Realistically speaking, this
will not leave too much time for a bill to go through all the steps needed for
enactment.
Tax uniformity has, however, advanced to the most promising point since
concerted efforts were begun by the A.B.A. some three and one-half years ago. And
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- u -
perhaps it would be better if legislation in this area was considered apart from
the rest of the tax program. I am inclined to take this view since virtually
all of the other tax recommendations have come under fire from one source or an
other* Political strategy indicates in this case that a tax uniformity proposal
not be included in the hot floor debates that will greet the rest of the tax
program. I also think that a one-month interval between the two x>rould provide an
ample time lapse for proper and uncomplicated consideration of our proposal.
Before leaving the subject of tax uniformity I would like to say a word
about the increased responsibility that will soon be placed upon individual bankers
When this whole matter has been given to Congress by the Treasury, our program of
banker contacts with the legislators must be intensified. We cannot be content
with a job only partially done. Every Senator and Representative must be made
aware of the existing tax inequality and how they can act to remedy it. Bankers
is every State have been working on this program for a long time, but we have no
way of knowing how effective it has been until the final vote is taken.
A home-grown illustration might better show you what I mean. In the
battle of Shiloh, during the War Between the States, the 16th Wisconsin Regiment
was hotly engaged with the enemy. A private dropped down beside his colonel and
asked how many rebels the officer had killed. The colonel carefully examined his
ammunition and replied that since he had fired thirty-seven bullets he must have
killed thirty-seven men. "But," he said, "I'm not sure of six of them."
Commercial bankers have fired at least 537 "shots," one for every Mem
ber of Congress, but there are quite a few of them we are not sure of.
The opportunity to make certain of our count has arrived, and we must
make the most of it
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 5 -
Another Presidential recommendation of great interest to bankers is
the one calling for a 20 per cent withholding tax on corporate dividends and
investment type interest®
On May 26 a panel of four Association witnesses testified before the
House Ways and Means Committee on this request® The A®B.A. first expressed com
plete agreement with the Treasury's objective of obtaining full payment of all
taxes legally due and owing and of seeing that taxable dividends and interest
are fully reported on Federal income tax returns.
We expressed our conclusion, however, that the proposal presented to
Congress is neither practical nor workable and would contribute to confusion
and irritation on the part of individual taxpayers® We also believe that it
would impose unreasonable hardships and inequities upon charitable, educational,
and other tax-exempt organizations, foreign and local governments, banks and
other dividend and interest payers®
In support of our conclusion the A.B.A. witnesses detailed the many
disadvantages of mandatory withholding® I am sure that you are familiar with
these so I won't repeat them here®
In lieu of mandatory withholding the Association suggested several
alternatives for improving taxpayer compliance until full use of electronic
data processing equipment enables the Internal Revenue Service to make more
effective use of information returns® We feel that when EDP is completely
operative, in a few years, it will eliminate the supposed need for mandatory
withholding® Incidentally, this view is also shared by the Deputy Commissioner
of Internal Revenue who made a speech to this effect a few weeks ago.
The suggested alternatives are as followss
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 6 -
1. A continuation of the educational program undertaken two years ago
by banks and other dividend payers which has had but one effective year to show
results®
2® The inclusion of appropriate questions on tax returns to clarify
and emphasize the dividend and interest tax obligation®
3® Increased prosecution of persistent underreporters and widespread
publicity on violations®
4.® Amnesty from criminal prosecution or civil penalties for those
taxpayers who correct omissions in past returns*
There is litte doubt that the mass of testimony in opposition to
withholding has made a great impression on Members of Congress. While they
might have little compassion for the problems confronting banks and other
dividend and interest payers, they will probably have second thoughts about
imposing such burdens upon their own constituents®
The President’s tax program has run into so much opposition that Con
gressional leaders may attempt to salvage only a small portion of it this year.
If withholding is the part chosen it will have rough sledding, whether through
regular legislative procedures, or by an amendment to another bill*
Once again we are faced with the finance charge disclosure bill by
Senator Douglas of Illinois which is cosponsored by Wisconsin’s Senator Proxmire®
This year it has a new title, "Truth in Lending," obviously intended to arouse
public appeal® Identical bills have been introduced in the House by Representa
tive Multer of New York and your own Representative Reuss.
These proposals would require all extenders of credit to furnish the
credit recipient a statement in writing disclosing the full dollar amount of the
charges involved and would also require that these charges be expressed in terms
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7
- -
of a simple annual rate. We understand that hearings will be held in the Senate
during this session but not until sometime in July, after more pressing legisla
tion has been acted upon.
The only major difference between this year5s measure and the one on
which hearings were held last year concerns the conformity of State disclosure
laws to the Federal law proposed by Senator Douglas. Unless State laws conform
substantially to those provisions contained in the Douglas bill, including the
simple annual interest requirement, they would have to be amended. Credit trans
actions in States without such statutes would be governed by the Federal law,
unless their legislatures enacted replicas of the Douglas bill®
Wisconsin, for example, has a disclosure law which pertains to motor
vehicle sales only, and its provisions do not include a ;simple annual interest
requirement. This law would have to be expanded considerably in order that Fed
eral law would not take precedence over credit transactions in Wisconsin.
Last year the A.B.A., in testimony before a Senate Subcommittee, en
dorsed the basic objective of the finance charge disclosure bill and the require
ment that lenders disclose to borrowers the dollar amount of finance charges on
instalment credit. It was pointed out that for manjr years the Association has
been stressing the need for giving full information on the terms of credit to
consumer instalment borrowers. However, the AeB.As took the view that expression
of such charges in terms of simple annual interest is not necessary to enable the
public to compare the cost of credit, that it would be an impractical and expen
sive requirement, and would only serve to confuse the customer. In addition, it
was felt that such regulation, without the simple annual interest expression,
could be more effectively administered and enforced at the State level.
Our position on the Douglas bill remains unchanged and we will be pre
pared to testify again this year. The future of this measure is cloudy. It has
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 8 -
evoked a good deal of opposition in the Senate Banking and Currency Committee
and may not even get out of the Subcommittee, where it was bottled up last year.
Passage by the Senate, then, is considered unlikely and the House seems even less
inclined to take favorable action.
Another proposal that bears watching is the one to provide for a Fed
eral system of mutual savings banks.
These banks would be privately managed, organized without capital stock,
and insurance by the F.D.I.C. would be mandatory. They would be permitted to join
the Federal Home Loan Bank System, though not required to do so, and would be
supervised by a new three-member commission. The proposals authorize the volun
tary conversion of Federal and State savings and loan associations and State-
chartered mutual savings banks into Federal mutual savings banks, and the conver
sion of Federal mutual savings banks into similar thrift institutions.
As you may know, the A.B.A. went on record by resolution at its con
vention last September opposing in principle the establishment of such a system.
The Association took this position because there has been no demonstrated public
need or demand for a system of Federal mutual banks; the proposal would force
mutual savings banks on States that have previously rejected or found no need
for such facilities; and a system of new mutual banks would most likely disperse
present savings rather than create new savings.
At this time the chances for consideration of the proposal in the
present session seem fairly remote. But it has a number of Congressional sup
porters and a concerted effort for enactment will undoubtedly be made next year.
There are several other bills of interest to banking that should be
mentioned at this time
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
9
- -
The National Association of Supervisors of State Banks has sponsored
two bills that have had the close attention of the A.B.A. One bill provides for
the removal of the Comptroller of the.Currency from the Board of Directors of
the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The other bill revises the method of
approval of applications for branch charters by requiring all insured banks to
obtain the approval of their supervisory authority and the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation.
After careful study, the Federal Legislative Committee of the A.B.A.
recommended that these bills not be approved in their present form, but offered
alternative proposals which have been submitted to the State Bank Supervisors.
Under our proposals the Comptroller of the Currency would remain on the Board
of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, but one of the other
directors would be designated the representative of the State - chartered banks.
Also, the A.B.A. is. on record as approving an enlargement of the Board from three
to five members, if necessary, to achieve this result. In the matter of branch
chartering, the alternative proposal would require a single approval for all banks,
both State and National, by their supervisory authorities. But it would give the
F.D.I.C. thirty days to intervene if the Corporation felt the proposed expansion
of the bank jeopardized in any way its insurance liability.
A bill to clarify the confused situation existing in the field of
Federal tax liens has been introduced under the sponsorship of the American Bar
Association. Our Tax Committee worked closely with the Bar Association in the
preparation of the bill and we are hopeful that this legislation will receive
the approval of the Congress because of the very serious need for clarification
in this area.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10
- -
This summarizes the outlook for banking legislation in the present
Congress and I know you will be interested in following the progress of these
various propositions as the S7th Congress moves along.
It is imperative that all of us, as citizens and as bankers, keep
abreast of legislative developments on the Federal level and take whatever
actions they make necessary. We alone have the responsibility of presenting
our opinions to our elected representatives in Washington, No one else can
represent banking’s views as well, nor with as much conviction and local empha
sis, as the individual banker.
This demands a constant sharing and interchange of thoughts between
you and your Congressmen, In this way both parties will be better informed and
the result will be better legislation.
Do what you can to make your influence felt in banking’s behalf. It
is not enough for us to have the perception to know what is right; we must have
the courage to speak up for it.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Cite this document
APA
Monroe Kimbrel (1961, June 19). Regional President Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_19610620_monroe_kimbrel
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_regional_speeche_19610620_monroe_kimbrel,
author = {Monroe Kimbrel},
title = {Regional President Speech},
year = {1961},
month = {Jun},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_19610620_monroe_kimbrel},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}