Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank taken over by regulators (2024)

As many of you are aware, Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), a bank licensed by the State of California whose deposits are insured by the FDIC, was seized by the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation and placed into FDIC receivership on Friday, March 10.

On Sunday, March 12, Signature Bank was seized by the New York State Department of Financial Services and also placed into an FDIC receivership. The FDIC has now established two separate “bridge banks” that will operate as ongoing banking businesses pending the FDIC’s ultimate resolution of these institutions.

Additionally, the US federal government has invoked a “systemic risk” authority to fully protect all depositors in each of these institutions. In the case of SVB, this was a significant change from the FDIC’s initial approach, which would have only protected depositors up to the US$250,000 FDIC insurance limit, leaving depositors with balances above the insurance limit to await the outcome of the sale of SVB’s assets before they knew how much of their remaining deposits would be repaid.

Norton Rose Fulbright recognizes that many of our clients, particularly in the technology, venture capital, and financial services sectors, may have questions regarding the effect of these developments.

What is a bridge bank?

A bridge bank is a temporary federally chartered national bank that the FDIC organizes to take over and maintain banking services for customers of a failed bank. The bridge bank provides the FDIC with time to stabilize the failed bank’s business and manage an orderly wind down or sale of the institution to a buyer. The FDIC transferred all the deposit liabilities and substantially all the assets of SVB and Signature Bank to respective bridge banks. The FDIC has reportedly already restarted the process of taking bids for SVB.

I heard that HSBC has acquired SVB. Is that correct?

SVB was the lead bank in a larger financial services organization. SVB had a separately incorporated subsidiary bank in the United Kingdom, Silicon Valley Bank UK Limited. As described in a statement issued by the Bank of England on March 13, the UK regulators took actions resulting in the sale of the UK subsidiary bank to HSBC UK Bank Plc, as a result of which the UK subsidiary will continue in operation. The acquisition of SVB’s UK operations does not extend to the US bank (the assets of which have been transferred to a bridge bank), the US securities business (which has appointed a chief restructuring officer and is reportedly exploring strategic options), the German branch of the business (which has been closed by local regulators and subjected to a moratorium), or other non-UK portions of the bank.

What is the status of my deposits?

You should have access to the full amount of your deposits as of Monday, March 13, 2023. The initial actions of the FDIC as receiver of SVB resulted in a temporary freeze of all deposits. In addition, depositors would initially have received only an unspecified portion of amounts on deposit above US$250,000. However, US government officials, in consultation with the President, invoked the “systemic risk” authority to assure that all depositors of SVB and Signature Bank would be made whole, and banking services resumed on Monday morning. Official checks of these institutions will continue to be honored.

If I have a loan from SVB, can I still draw on it?

At this stage, there is no definitive statement on how the FDIC will administer the bridge banks. In the past, the FDIC has sought to continue lending and honor obligations under credit agreements so long as doing so would not increase losses to the FDIC’s deposit insurance fund.

What will happen with contracts (including swaps) involving SVB?

After the commencement of an FDIC receivership, the FDIC generally has the power to repudiate or enforce contracts, and provisions that allow termination of a contract due to the insolvency or appointment of the FDIC as receiver are generally unenforceable. The FDIC as receiver can generally prevent a third party from terminating, accelerating or declaring a default under a contract for a period of 90 days without the consent of the FDIC. The FDIC can also request that a court grant a stay of legal proceedings of up to 90 days. A new bridge bank may also request a stay of 45 days for claims against it arising from its acquisition of assets or assumption of liabilities from a failed bank.

Special rules apply to qualified financial contracts (“QFCs”). The FDIC was required to make certain decisions by Monday, March 13 at 5:00 pm regarding SVB’s QFC portfolio. The FDIC decided to transfer all QFCs of both SVB and Signature Bank to the respective bridge banks. This generally means that a counterparty may not terminate the QFCs on the grounds of appointment of a receiver for SVB or Signature Bank.

What will ultimately happen with loans owed to SVB?

In an FDIC receivership, loans made by the bank being wound-up are usually sold to a successor bank. This can be a single bank, or several. There is currently no announcement on which banks will acquire the SVB loan portfolio. In the interim, the bridge banks should continue to service the loans and other credit arrangement that were transferred from their respective predecessor institutions, and borrowers must generally continue to make their loan payments in the ordinary course.

Is there an “order of priority” of creditors in an FDIC receivership, like there is in bankruptcy?

Yes. Normally, insured deposits are made whole (unless the depositor is delinquent with respect to loans or other obligations to the bank) and the order of priority is, in descending order:

  1. secured creditors,
  2. administrative expenses of the receivership,
  3. deposits above the insured limit; and
  4. general unsecured creditors.

In the case of SVB and Signature Bank, however, the use of the “systemic risk” authority means that all depositors will be paid in full. Other claims, particularly those of shareholders and unsecured creditors are not protected by the systemic risk authority and remain subject to potential losses.

Are other banks facing the same problems as SVB and Signature Bank?

The Federal Reserve Board introduced a lending facility (called the Bank Term Funding Program) for virtually all US federally insured banks and credit unions that generally allows the banks to borrow from the Fed using the bank’s mortgage securities and bond portfolio as collateral.US branches and agencies of foreign banks are also generally eligible to borrow under the facility. Importantly, the securities can be valued at par for borrowing purposes. One of the problems that SVB faced was that it was forced to recognize losses when it sold some of the securities in its portfolio to raise cash to meet depositor withdrawals. The Fed’s lending facility means that banks do not have to sell their securities at a loss. They can instead borrow from the Fed. The market’s knowledge that banks should be able to borrow from the Fed if necessary to fund deposit withdrawals should assure depositors that they do need not race to withdraw deposits ahead of others. The Fed has stated that banks will be able to borrow from the Fed under this special loan facility for the next year. If you are a bank and want to borrow from the Fed, the Fed has prepared a standing template for such requests and provided additional information in a set of FAQs.

Where can I find further Information?

If you have questions about what this means for you, please reach out to Tim Byrne (tim.byrne@nortonrosefulbright.com), Steve Dollar (steve.dollar@nortonrosefulbright.com), Tom Delaney (thomas.delaney@nortonrosefulbright.com), Mike Keeley, (mike.keeley@nortonrosefulbright.com), Eric Daucher (eric.daucher@nortonrosefulbright.com), or your regular Norton Rose Fulbright contact.

Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank taken over by regulators (2024)

FAQs

Did the regulators know about SVB? ›

The Fed's report deals exclusively with SVB and its parent holding company, Silicon Valley Bank Financial Group (SVBFG). Both reports make it clear that regulators were aware, for many years prior, of the problems that caused these banks to fail in 2023.

Why did regulators take over Signature Bank? ›

In a joint statement released on Sunday, March 12, 2023, the U.S. Treasury Department, Federal Reserve, and FDIC said that keeping Signature Bank open would have threatened the stability of the entire banking system, and through their actions, they sought to reassure Americans that any financial contagion was firmly ...

What happens when regulators take over bank? ›

When a bank fails, the FDIC or a state regulatory agency takes over and either sells or dissolves the bank. Most banks in the US are insured by the FDIC, which provides coverage up to $250,000 per depositor, per FDIC bank, per ownership category.

Who regulated the Silicon Valley Bank? ›

SVB was a state member bank. Therefore, the Federal Reserve was SVB's primary federal regulator, and the FDIC was the secondary federal regulator.

Is SVB taken over by regulator? ›

The California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation closed the embattled bank and appointed the FDIC as receiver, regulators said Friday. Silicon Valley Bank has been closed and regulators have taken over the firm's deposits, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Did banking regulators shutter SVB move quickly to avert crisis? ›

California banking regulators closed the bank, which did business as Silicon Valley Bank, on Friday and appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver for later disposition of its assets.

Who owns Signature Bank now? ›

Signature Bank
Company typePublic
SuccessorsFlagstar Bank (acquisition of Signature Bank's loans and branches) Customers Bancorp (acquisition of Signature Bank's venture banking portfolio)
HeadquartersNew York City, New York, U.S.
13 more rows

Why did Silicon Valley Bank fail? ›

The collapse happened for multiple reasons, including a lack of diversification and a classic bank run, where many customers withdrew their deposits simultaneously due to fears of the bank's solvency. Many of SVB's depositors were startup companies.

Who regulated Signature Bank? ›

DFS appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver of the bank. Signature Bank is a New York state-chartered commercial bank and is FDIC-insured, with total assets of approximately $110.36 billion and total deposits of approximately $88.59 billion as of December 31, 2022.

Why did Signature Bank fail? ›

The collapse of Signature Bank was due to “poor management,” according to a report from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation released Friday. Bank management “did not always heed FDIC examiner concerns, and was not always responsive or timely in addressing FDIC supervisory recommendations,” the report said.

What are the regulatory flaws of SVB? ›

Regulatory standards for SVB were too low, the supervision of SVB did not work with sufficient force and urgency, and contagion from the firm's failure posed systemic consequences not contemplated by the Federal Reserve's tailoring framework.

What's going to happen to Signature Bank? ›

Acquiring Institution: Flagstar Bank, N.A.

The 40 former branches of Signature Bank will operate under New York Community Bancorp's Flagstar Bank, N.A., on Monday, March 20, 2023. The branches will open during their normal business hours.

Who owns Silicon Valley Bank? ›

What happened to Silicon Valley Bank? ›

On March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) failed after a bank run, marking the third-largest bank failure in United States history and the largest since the 2007–2008 financial crisis. It was one of three bank failures, along with Silvergate Bank and Signature Bank, in March 2023 in the United States.

Who is suing Silicon Valley Bank? ›

IRS sues FDIC over Silicon Valley Bank's $1.4 billion tax debt | Reuters.

Did regulators close second bank and move to protect deposits? ›

Federal regulators announced on Sunday that another bank had been closed and that the government would ensure that all depositors of Silicon Valley Bank — which failed Friday — would be paid back in full as Washington rushed to keep fallout from the collapse of the large institution from sweeping through the financial ...

Who triggered the SVB bank run? ›

Bank run. When SVB announced their $1.75 billion capital raising on March 8, people became alarmed the bank was short on capital. Word spread quickly on social media accounts such as Twitter and WhatsApp inducing panic that the bank didn't have enough funds. Customers started to withdraw money in waves.

Did the FDIC find a buyer for SVB? ›

The former SVB's loan portfolio focuses on the startup sector, primarily in the tech industry. On Sunday, March 26, 2023, the FDIC announced that it entered into a purchase and assumption agreement with First-Citizens Bank & Trust Company (First-Citizens) for all deposits and loans of SVBB.

Did SVB have no risk officer? ›

Silicon Valley Bank had no official chief risk officer for 8 months while the VC market was spiraling. The prominent private bank was closed on Friday. Silicon Valley Bank, a lender that was a fixture in the venture capital space for decades, collapsed on Friday.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Fr. Dewey Fisher

Last Updated:

Views: 5766

Rating: 4.1 / 5 (62 voted)

Reviews: 85% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Fr. Dewey Fisher

Birthday: 1993-03-26

Address: 917 Hyun Views, Rogahnmouth, KY 91013-8827

Phone: +5938540192553

Job: Administration Developer

Hobby: Embroidery, Horseback riding, Juggling, Urban exploration, Skiing, Cycling, Handball

Introduction: My name is Fr. Dewey Fisher, I am a powerful, open, faithful, combative, spotless, faithful, fair person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.