Banking-as-a-service players at crossroads
Banks that carry consent orders regarding their fintech partnerships are facing tough dynamics striking a balance between the benefit of growth and the rising compliance costs associated with it.
In recent months, an increasing number of consent orders have been issued to community banks that provide deposit accounts, loans and payment services to fintech companies' end customers. Even as banks face regulatory challenges, fintechs' interest in banking is only growing and becoming even more granular. The business case for banking-as-a-service (BAAS) remains strong, but banks should be wary of a fintech partner pursuing aggressive growth at the bank's sacrifice, industry experts said.
Weak negotiations, vague language in contracts and lack of visibility into fintechs' growth plans could lead to serious compliance and operational issues for the bank, and the recent enforcement actions have reiterated regulators' message that the responsibility of compliance ultimately falls on the bank.
Resolving compliance issues under consent orders often means significant investments in personnel and procedures, a shift of priority to compliance, and in some cases, limitations on growth. It could erase the advantage of the BaaS business model, which attracted many community banks to drive fee income and deposit growth.
In 2023, the median return on average assets in a group of 59 BaaS banks was 0.85%, 10 percentage points lower than the median of traditional community banks, according to an S&P Global Market Intelligence analysis. The median of their net interest margins was slightly lower than that of traditional community banks, and the efficiency ratio was significantly higher.
It is increasingly clear that only the well-managed fintech-bank partnerships will last, but the marketplace is demanding more clarity as to what regulators would consider well managed.
The American Fintech Council, an industry group representing fintechs and BaaS banks, has endorsed a bipartisan bill that seeks to provide greater transparency in bank exams, dubbed the FAIR Exams Act. It would establish a new appeals process for banks to resolve disagreements between their regulators. Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) and Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.) introduced a bipartisan bill on April 18 in the House. A companion bill was introduced in the Senate in December 2023 by Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
"Federal regulatory agencies shouldn't be regulating via enforcement. They should create uniform, guidance and structures to enable banks and fintechs who want to operate within the confines of a fair system to have the ability to do stuff," said Phil Goldfeder, CEO of the American Fintech Council.
Source: S&P Global Market Intelligence
|