Rebooting the Community Reinvestment Act

IF 1.3 3区 社会学 Q3 BUSINESS American Business Law Journal Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1111/ablj.12247
Lindsay Sain Jones, Goldburn Maynard Jr.
{"title":"Rebooting the Community Reinvestment Act","authors":"Lindsay Sain Jones,&nbsp;Goldburn Maynard Jr.","doi":"10.1111/ablj.12247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was passed in 1977 as a response to redlining, the systemic discrimination against loan applicants who resided in predominantly Black neighborhoods. In enacting the CRA, Congress found that banks have a “continuing and affirmative obligation” to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they are chartered. To that end, the CRA requires bank regulators to rate the record of each bank in fulfilling these obligations. While much has changed since 1977, some things have not. Financial services are now provided by a much broader set of entities including financial technology (fintech) firms, yet the CRA's mandates still just apply to banks. In addition, while the demographic compositions of neighborhoods have changed since 1977, Black applicants are still 2.5 times more likely than White applicants to be rejected for a home loan. On October 24, 2023, the banking agencies jointly issued final rules to “strengthen and modernize” the agencies' CRA regulations. While the updated rules do inject more objectivity in order to address persistent concerns about CRA ratings inflation, we contend that further amendments are needed to account for what has changed and what has not changed since its original enactment. In this article, we argue that the CRA continues to be a worthwhile endeavor, as it addresses gaps left by fair lending laws. To further its impact and address its many shortcomings though, we contend the CRA should be amended to also apply to nonbanks that provide financial services, to counter discrimination more directly, and to calculate CRA ratings more objectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":54186,"journal":{"name":"American Business Law Journal","volume":"61 3","pages":"167-190"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ablj.12247","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Business Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ablj.12247","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was passed in 1977 as a response to redlining, the systemic discrimination against loan applicants who resided in predominantly Black neighborhoods. In enacting the CRA, Congress found that banks have a “continuing and affirmative obligation” to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they are chartered. To that end, the CRA requires bank regulators to rate the record of each bank in fulfilling these obligations. While much has changed since 1977, some things have not. Financial services are now provided by a much broader set of entities including financial technology (fintech) firms, yet the CRA's mandates still just apply to banks. In addition, while the demographic compositions of neighborhoods have changed since 1977, Black applicants are still 2.5 times more likely than White applicants to be rejected for a home loan. On October 24, 2023, the banking agencies jointly issued final rules to “strengthen and modernize” the agencies' CRA regulations. While the updated rules do inject more objectivity in order to address persistent concerns about CRA ratings inflation, we contend that further amendments are needed to account for what has changed and what has not changed since its original enactment. In this article, we argue that the CRA continues to be a worthwhile endeavor, as it addresses gaps left by fair lending laws. To further its impact and address its many shortcomings though, we contend the CRA should be amended to also apply to nonbanks that provide financial services, to counter discrimination more directly, and to calculate CRA ratings more objectively.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重启《社区再投资法
社区再投资法》(Community Reinvestment Act,CRA)于 1977 年通过,以应对对居住在以黑人为主的社区的贷款申请人的系统性歧视。国会在颁布 CRA 时认为,银行有 "持续和积极的义务 "帮助满足其特许经营社区的信贷需求。为此,CRA 要求银行监管机构对每家银行履行这些义务的记录进行评级。虽然自 1977 年以来发生了许多变化,但有些事情并没有改变。现在,包括金融技术(fintech)公司在内的更多实体都在提供金融服务,但 CRA 的规定仍然只适用于银行。此外,虽然自 1977 年以来社区的人口构成发生了变化,但黑人申请者在申请住房贷款时被拒绝的可能性仍然是白人的 2.5 倍。2023 年 10 月 24 日,各银行机构联合发布了最终规则,以 "加强和更新 "各机构的 CRA 法规。虽然更新后的规则确实注入了更多的客观性,以解决对 CRA 评级膨胀的持续担忧,但我们认为还需要进一步修订,以说明自最初颁布以来哪些方面发生了变化,哪些方面没有变化。在本文中,我们认为 CRA 仍然是一项值得努力的工作,因为它弥补了公平借贷法留下的空白。不过,为了进一步扩大其影响并解决其诸多不足,我们认为应该对 CRA 进行修订,使其也适用于提供金融服务的非银行,更直接地打击歧视行为,并更客观地计算 CRA 评级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The ABLJ is a faculty-edited, double blind peer reviewed journal, continuously published since 1963. Our mission is to publish only top quality law review articles that make a scholarly contribution to all areas of law that impact business theory and practice. We search for those articles that articulate a novel research question and make a meaningful contribution directly relevant to scholars and practitioners of business law. The blind peer review process means legal scholars well-versed in the relevant specialty area have determined selected articles are original, thorough, important, and timely. Faculty editors assure the authors’ contribution to scholarship is evident. We aim to elevate legal scholarship and inform responsible business decisions.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Rebooting the Community Reinvestment Act High-status versus low-status stakeholders Innovation stakeholders: Developing a sustainable paradigm to integrate intellectual property and corporate social responsibility Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1