2026 ISSUE 3 OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE NEBRASKA BANKERS ASSOCIATION President’s Message Fighting Fraud on Multiple Fronts
233 S. 13th St., Ste. 700 Lincoln, NE 68508 Phone: (402) 474-1555 • Fax: (402) 474-2946 www.nebankers.org EDITORIAL STAFF RICHARD BAIER President & CEO richard.baier@nebankers.org GISELA JUNDT Director of Communications & Marketing gisela.jundt@nebankers.org BOARD OF DIRECTORS TRAVIS SEARS NBA Chair Union Bank & Trust Co., Lincoln SCOTT ZIMBELMAN NBA Chair-Elect Homestead Bank, Cozad MARK LINVILLE NBA Past Chair First State Bank, Randolph KRISTY BARTAK Nebraska State Bank & Trust Co. Broken Bow NICK BAXTER First National Bank of Omaha Omaha THOMAS CORRIGAN ACCESSbank Omaha KRYSTI CUNNINGHAM Security National Bank of Omaha Omaha JASON HANSEN Associated Bank Omaha CURTIS HEAPY Western Nebraska Bank Curtis ZAC HOLOCH Cornerstone Bank York JEFF KANGER First State Bank Nebraska Lincoln KRISTEN MARSHALL-MASER Five Points Bank Grand Island JEREMY McHUGH Corn Growers State Bank Murdock AARON OTTEN Elkhorn Valley Bank & Trust Norfolk KEVIN POSTIER Henderson State Bank Henderson LUKE RICKERTSEN Flatwater Bank Gothenburg BRIAN SCHWEIGER U.S. Bank, N.A. Lincoln RYNE SEAMAN Cattle Bank & Trust Seward RYAN STEFFENSMEIER First Community Bank Beemer KELLY TRAMBLY South Central State Bank Campbell NICK VRBA RVR Bank Fremont MICHAEL WHEELER Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Omaha ANDREW WITT Dundee Bank Omaha NBA 4 NEBRASKA BANKER
The Clear Choice Elevate your debit program performance With superior net economics, unmatched personal service, transparent billing, and Experian®-backed cardholder security benefits, Discover Debit delivers the capabilities to grow a successful debit program – making it the clear choice for community financial institutions like yours. Learn more at DiscoverDebit.com/Choice Discover® Debit
EDITORIAL: Nebraska Banker seeks to provide news and information relevant to Nebraska and other news and information of direct interest to members of the Nebraska Bankers Association. Statement of fact and opinion are made on the responsibility of the authors alone and do not represent the opinion or endorsement of the NBA. Articles may be reproduced with written permission only. ADVERTISEMENTS: The publication of advertisements does not necessarily represent endorsement of those products or services by the NBA. The editor reserves the right to refuse any advertisement. SUBSCRIPTION: Subscription to the magazine, which began bimonthly publication in May 2006, is included in membership fees to the NBA. ©2026 The Nebraska Bankers Association (NBA) | MBR Connect™. All rights reserved. Nebraska Banker is published six times per year and is the official publication for this association. The information contained in this publication is intended to provide general information for review, consideration and education. The contents do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. If you need legal advice or assistance, it is strongly recommended that you contact an attorney as to your circumstances. The statements and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of NBA, its board of directors or the publisher. Likewise, the appearance of advertisements within this publication does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation of any product or service advertised. Nebraska Banker is a collective work, and as such, some articles are submitted by authors who are independent of NBA. While a first-print policy is encouraged, in cases where this is not possible, every effort has been made to comply with any known reprint guidelines or restrictions. Content may not be reproduced or reprinted without prior written permission. For further information, please contact the publisher at (801) 676-9722. CONTENTS 12 22 8 PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE FIGHTING FRAUD ON MULTIPLE FRONTS Richard J. Baier, President and CEO, Nebraska Bankers Association 10 WASHINGTON UPDATE THE LEGACY OF AMERICAN BANKING Rob Nichols, President and CEO, American Bankers Association 11 SAVE THE DATE FALL AGRI-BUSINESS CONFERENCE 12 2026 NBA ANNUAL CONVENTION HIGHLIGHTS May 6-8, Embassy Suites Omaha 15 COUNSELOR’S CORNER NEBRASKA’S NEW ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS ACT What Creditors Need to Know Mike T. Franken, Baird Holm LLP 18 FDIC RESCINDS GUIDANCE ON MULTIPLE RE-PRESENTMENT NSF FEES Brett Goodnack, JD, CAMS, Compliance Advisor, Compliance Alliance 20 HOME MORTGAGE DISCLOSURE ACT (HMDA) REQUIREMENTS AND RECOMMENDED PRACTICES Frank Antiga, CPA, CBAP, Risk Advisory Principal, S.R. Snodgrass PC 22 BUILDING THE FOUNDATION FOR EFFECTIVE AI Closing the Data Readiness Gap Ajay John, VP of Data Science & AI, CSI 24 TECH TALK CRAFTING AN EFFECTIVE DOCUMENT RETENTION POLICY Alex Driver, Information Security Consultant, SBS CyberSecurity 26 2026 ABA AGRICULTURAL BANKERS CONFERENCE 28 2026 EDUCATION CALENDAR 6 NEBRASKA BANKER
BETTER TOOLS SERVICE BANKING Call Tim or Travis today to find out how much you could save. Tim Burns 402-480-0075 Travis Anderson 402-440-2448 mibanc.com MEMBER FDIC Lending Services Operational Services Audit Services* * Audit Services are offered thru MIB Banc Services, LLC, a subsidiary of our holding company. New Service in 2026 LIQUIDITY REVIEW A review is conducted of your liquidity position using safe and sound banking practices. The review will focus on policies and procedures, funding plan and testing, and monitoring and reporting. COMPLIANCE SERVICES • ACH Audit • BSA/AML/CFT Audit • Directors’ Examination • Lending Compliance Audit • Deposit Compliance Audit • Interest Rate Risk Review • Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) Review • Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing (SAFE) Act Audit • Liquidity Review LOAN REVIEW SERVICES We specialize in loan review and compliance services for community banks throughout the Midwest. mibanc.com audit
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE Fighting on Multiple Fronts Richard J. Baier, President and CEO Nebraska Bankers Association NBA friends, Member input is the driving force behind the work of your association. Throughout 2025, member banks continually raised concerns about consumer fraud impacting our fellow Nebraskans and their customers. Based on this input, the NBA Board leadership tasked the NBA staff with researching and presenting a mitigation strategy. The Board ultimately approved a multi-pronged strategy at their August 2025 meeting: banker education, cross-bank collaboration, advocacy and public policy, and increased consumer awareness. To support the successful implementation of this strategy, the NBA Board also approved a substantial commitment of staffing and financial resources. The following is a summary of the strategic impacts to date. Banker Education • The inaugural NBA Fraud Summit was held Aug. 27, 2025, at UNL’s Innovation Campus, with more than 200 bankers in attendance; we received exceptional reviews of this program from attendees. • The 2026 NBA Fraud Summit is planned for Aug. 27 at UNL’s Innovation Campus. A list of excellent speakers has been incorporated into the program, including law enforcement, technology vendors, legal experts and bankers. • The NBA launched an in-depth Fraud Peer Group that included multiple sessions where interested stakeholders could share specific information and discuss bank-level strategies. Cross-Bank Collaboration The NBA Fraud Community Platform provides participating NBA members with a free online portal that allows members to freely share information on specific fraud activities and highlight various prevention strategies. Participating banks must be 314(b) certified. To date, more than 30 Nebraska banks have registered to participate in the platform. The site has been averaging more than three postings per week. If you would like to learn more, please reach out to any NBA staff member at (402) 474-1555. Advocacy and Public Policy Recognizing that fraud prevention is not just a banking issue, the NBA government relations team partnered with several interested stakeholders, including elected officials and other advocacy groups like AARP, to form the Fraud Free Nebraska Coalition (FFN). This group subsequently shepherded the introduction of fraud-mitigation legislative proposals in the Nebraska Legislature. Through hard work, banker engagement and strong partnerships, the following legislation was approved and signed by Gov. Pillen: • LB 785: Criminalizes the use of possession of a mailbox key by an unauthorized person. The goal of this proposal is to help prevent check fraud. • LB 838: Allows banks to designate an “authorized contact” in the event of an emergency, loss of contact with the customer or a suspected consumer fraud. • LB 1118: The first of its kind in the country, this legislation requires social media firms to develop and enforce 8 NEBRASKA BANKER
enhanced “know your customer” requirements for firms advertising on various social media platforms. The legislation also requires social media firms to develop a process for detecting, investigating and taking down fraudulent advertisements in a timely manner. The FFN also worked closely to get legislative approval for a proposal to offer additional protections for consumers facing insurance fraud. Finally, LB 1082, which would have required telecommunications providers to further protect customers from unsolicited and spoofed calls and text messages, did not cross the proverbial finish line. However, the NBA is committed to additional strategies to address spoofing. Most recently, the Federal Communications Commission, with input from the states and the American Bankers Association, enacted enhanced penalties upon organizations that originate spoofed phone calls and text messages. Consumer Awareness Last, but certainly not least, the NBA launched the “That’s a RED Flag” campaign at the 2026 NBA Annual Convention to further educate Nebraska consumers about consumer fraud, trends and potential responses. The campaign includes the following: • Printed and promotional materials (some available with co-branding) available to member banks for distribution, including brochures, magnets, stickers, temporary tattoos, logo wear, etc. You can view this information on the NBA website (nebankers.org) under the Fraud Resources tab. (Who wouldn’t be excited about a “That’s a RED Flag” t-shirt, golf shirt or logo socks?) • The NBA commissioned a Lincoln-based marketing firm to produce a series of short anti-fraud videos. These videos will be released over the next three months and placed on various broadcast media, streaming and social media platforms; we encourage your bank to share these resources on your social media outlets. The NBA website includes a social media kit for banks. • Finally, consumers who want to learn more about types of fraud, as well as potential action steps, can visit thatsaREDflag.com for more information. Obviously, we will never be able to fully stop the rampant fraud that is occurring across our state. However, we owe it to ourselves, our banks, our customers and our communities to aggressively pursue fraud mitigation strategies at every corner. I encourage you to get involved in the NBA’s efforts to learn about and educate others on the red flags of fraud! 800.228.2581 MHM.INC Now more than ever people want self-service options. With our core integrated ITMs we can make this a reality both in the lobby and in the drive-up of your branch. SELF-SERVICE BANKING 9 NEBRASKA BANKER
On July 4, cities and towns across the nation celebrated 250 years of American independence. By and large, Americans all know our founding story: how a group of 13 original colonies broke free from Great Britain, formed a union and grew over two and a half centuries into a global superpower. But perhaps a lesser-known part of that story is the critical role that banks played in securing American independence and transforming this nation into what it is today. Great Britain forbade its American colonies from operating their own banks — just one of the many restrictions that pushed the colonies to rebel. With no established banking system, the colonists found themselves at a disadvantage, and the Revolutionary War effort faltered until the Bank of North America was chartered by the Second Continental Congress in 1781. Based in Philadelphia, the bank began operations in 1782, and was an immediate success, paying strong dividends to investors, and providing a critical line of credit to the fledgling Congress. The Bank of North America was the first commercial bank in the U.S. While it refashioned itself in the 1780s, it lived on as a model for the First Bank of the United States, which was founded in 1791 by Alexander Hamilton to help stabilize a nascent U.S. financial system beleaguered by heavy war debts. Hamilton believed in the power of the private banking model for maintaining discipline; when the Bank of the United States was opened, it marked the first IPO in American history. Private investors owned 80% of the Bank of the United States, with the government owning the remaining 20%. While the Bank of the United States charter lapsed, briefly at first and then permanently in 1836, it demonstrated to young leaders like Abraham Lincoln what a diverse, well-capitalized banking system could do to grow our economy. Throughout moments that followed — the Civil War, the growth of the United States as an industrial superpower, our victory in two world wars — banking was what helped propel America forward WASHINGTON UPDATE The Legacy of American Banking Rob Nichols, President and CEO American Bankers Association 10 NEBRASKA BANKER
and into new stages of growth and development. Throughout our history, Americans have relied on banks of all sizes to provide the credit needed for individuals and businesses to thrive. Our financial ecosystem is unique in terms of the diversity of institutions that operate today — from small community banks, mutuals and minority depository institutions that serve niche markets, to midsize and regional banks, to the largest global financial institutions operating on multiple continents. Our country has thrived thanks to that interconnected network of financial institutions, and it’s helped create the opportunity for Americans from sea to shining sea to participate in the economy and pursue their dreams. And that’s an American tradition worth protecting and worth celebrating. Email Rob at nichols@aba.com. 11 NEBRASKA BANKER
2026 NBA Annual Convention Highlights May 6-8, Embassy Suites Omaha The NBA honored seven bankers who have served the industry for 50 years and one bank that marked a 100-year milestone anniversary of service to its community. (Not pictured: Charlene Baker, Security First Bank, Harrison; Larry Lindner, Town & Country Bank, Pleasanton) Bob Brandt, Countryside Bank, Unadilla Commercial State Bank, Wausa David Hall, Countryside Bank, Unadilla NBA President & CEO Richard Baier shared updates and conducted business with the NBA membership during the annual meeting. NBA member banks contributed over $60,000 to the Nebraska Banks Back First Responders fund. These funds will support the first responders who worked tirelessly to protect lives, property and livelihoods during the devastating fires across western Nebraska earlier this year. Nancee Sinsel, Minden Exchange Bank & Trust Co., Minden Richard Clements, American Exchange Bank, Elmwood Steven Michel, Henderson State Bank, Henderson The NBA launched its new fraud awareness campaign, That’s a RED Flag, during the annual convention. The campaign is designed to help Nebraska banks educate their customers and communities about “red flags” of fraud and scams, while empowering consumers to recognize suspicious activity before financial harm occurs. Shane Kalin, Northwest Bank, Omaha, received the NBA/ Prochnow Educational Foundation Scholarship to the two-year Graduate School of Banking in Wisconsin. 12 NEBRASKA BANKER
Attendees enjoyed entertainment from the Blooze Brothers, a Chicago-based band that pays homage to the original Blues Brothers music and the spirit in which they played. The NBA Leadership Class of 2026 celebrated the completion of the two-year program. 2026-2027 NBA Foundation Scholarship Recipients - Each year the NBA Foundation awards up to 10 scholarships to students with an interest in banking and/or pursuing banking- and business-related degrees at state and private colleges in Nebraska. The NBA introduced the Leadership Class of 2028. 2026-2027 NBA leadership, from left: NBA Chair-Elect Scott Zimbelman (Homestead Bank, Cozad), NBA Past Chair Mark Linville (First State Bank, Randolph), NBA Chair Travis Sears (Union Bank & Trust, Lincoln) and NBA President & CEO Richard Baier State Senators Carolyn Bosn, Bob Hallstrom, and Mike Jacobson joined NBA leadership and other representatives from the Fraud Free Nebraska Coalition to celebrate the passage of key anti-fraud legislation during the 2026 session. 13 NEBRASKA BANKER
Flatwater Bank, Gothenburg i3 Bank, Bennington Countryside Bank, Unadilla Commercial State Bank, Wausa Doug Johnson, Commercial State Bank, Wausa Midwest Bank, Norfolk RVR Bank, Fremont NebraskaLand Bank, North Platte MNB Bank, McCook Cornerstone Bank, York Union Bank & Trust, Lincoln The NBA recognized Nebraska banks and one banker who are dedicated to improving financial literacy in their communities. The following received Leaders in Financial Education (LiFE) Awards across four categories: LiFE Honors List, Presentation Award, Bank Innovation Award and Career Award. Congrats to the following recipients: Lt. Governor Joe Kelly read a proclamation on behalf of Gov. Jim Pillen, proclaiming May as Fraud Awareness Month in Nebraska and stressing the importance of heightened vigilance as fraud schemes continue to evolve. 14 NEBRASKA BANKER
On March 3, 2026, Nebraska became the first state to adopt the Uniform Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Act (the “Act”). An assignment for the benefit of creditors (“ABC”) is a voluntary transfer of a business’s assets to an independent assignee for the purpose of liquidating those assets and maximizing their value for the benefit of creditors. Although ABCs are substantively similar to Chapter 7 bankruptcies, they are not directly supervised by courts and do not have to comply with the federal bankruptcy code or other rules of civil procedure. As such, ABCs can offer a faster and more flexible alternative to bankruptcy. Due to the nature of an ABC, the Act specifically identifies who it applies to (the assignor) and who can serve as an assignee. For a business or individual to initiate an ABC as an assignor under the Act, it must (1) have a principal place of business in Nebraska; (2) have its internal affairs governed by Nebraska law; (3) reside in Nebraska; or (4) be an affiliated entity that is, at least partially, owned by a Nebraska-based entity. If the assignor falls within this criteria, it may assign its assets to an assignee for liquidation as long as the assignee (1) is not a creditor, affiliate or insider of the assignor; (2) is not an affiliate or insider of a creditor; (3) does not have claims against the assignment estate (the “Estate”); or (4) does not have a material financial interest in the outcome of the ABC. Initiation of the ABC An ABC is initiated when both the assignor and assignee execute the Assignment Agreement (the “Agreement”). To comply with the Act, the Agreement must be signed by both the assignor and assignee and include the following: • The name and address of the assignor and assignee; • A provision transferring or providing for the transfer of all the assignor’s assets; • A sufficient description of the assigned assets to identify them; • A provision governing the distribution of the Estate; • A description of the assignee’s fees and the basis for calculation; and • A representation by the assignor, under the penalty of perjury, that it is assigning all its assets. Importantly, the Act requires the assignor to transfer all its assets to ensure the Estate possesses all property subject to creditors’ claims. If the assignor fails to assign all its property, it risks losing the protections and benefits of the ABC process. Assignee’s Duties and Responsibilities Upon execution of the Agreement, the assignee obtains all rights, title and interests of the assignor in the assigned assets and must comply with fairly rigorous requirements in administering the Estate. Specifically, the assignee becomes a fiduciary who is legally obligated to (1) manage the ABC in good faith; (2) use reasonable care to maximize COUNSELOR’S CORNER Nebraska’s New Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Act What Creditors Need to Know Mike T. Franken Baird Holm LLP 15 NEBRASKA BANKER
distributions; and (3) wind up the Estate in the best interests of the Estate and creditors. If the assignee breaches a fiduciary duty, they can be held personally liable for any individualized harm a creditor suffers as a result of the breach or for any general harm suffered by the Estate or any particular class of creditors. Creditors Must File Proofs of Claim Once the Estate possesses all the assignor’s assets, the assignee must notify all known creditors of the ABC within 30 days. The assignee must also establish a method to permit creditors to submit proofs of claim and impose a deadline for their submission. The deadline must be at least 90 days after the execution of the Agreement but cannot exceed 210 days following the Agreement’s execution. As part of the notification process, the assignee must inform creditors of the established method to submit claims and the requisite deadline. Creditors then bear the burden to submit proofs of claim that comply with the Act and the assignee’s instructions. A proof of claim complies with the Act if it includes: 1. The name, address and other contact information necessary to communicate with the creditor; 2. The amount of the claim; 3. The nature of the claim;1 4. A description of any Estate asset securing the claim; and 5. All documents upon which the claim is based. If a proof of claim satisfies these requirements, both the claimed amount and basis for the claim are presumptively valid. But if a creditor submits a proof of claim beyond the imposed deadline, the assignee may only allow the claim if there is a reasonable basis for the untimely submission. Disputing Proofs of Claim Upon a creditor’s submission of a proof of claim, the assignee may either accept the claim or dispute it. If the assignee disputes a claim, they must send the creditor a notice identifying the reason for the dispute. But the assignee does not have the authority to unilaterally deny a claim. If the assignee and creditor are unable to mutually resolve the dispute, the assignee must initiate a legal proceeding to obtain a judicial determination as to the claim’s validity. Importantly, the assignee must commence this proceeding prior to the Estate’s final distribution. If the proceeding is not initiated before then, the assignee effectively waives their dispute and must allow the claim. Recovery Based on Priority and Value of Collateral Once the assignee receives all claims and the deadline to submit new claims expires, creditors receive disbursements based on the priority of their claims as determined by the Uniform Commercial Code and other applicable law. As a result, a creditor’s recovery largely depends on whether its claim is secured or unsecured and oversecured or undersecured. Secured Claims: The Act allows oversecured creditors to receive contractually authorized interest, fees, costs and other charges, which may include attorney’s fees, to the extent the value of their collateral exceeds the amount of their secured claim. However, if the value of the collateral is less than the amount of the claim, the creditor holds a secured claim up to the value of the collateral and an unsecured claim for the remaining deficiency. Unsecured Claims: Unsecured claims are paid according to their applicable priority. If there are insufficient funds to fully satisfy claims within a given priority class, each creditor receives a pro rata distribution based on its proportionate share of the total claims in that class. Late-Filed Claims Not Accepted for Cause: If the estate ultimately contains sufficient funds to satisfy all timely filed claims, any remaining assets may be distributed to late-filed claims that were not initially allowed by the assignee. Key Differences between an ABC and Bankruptcy Although ABCs share many similarities with bankruptcy proceedings, there are notable differences. Mainly, ABCs do not impose an automatic stay on active or future litigation concerning the assignor or debtor. As such, creditors are not barred from attempting to collect on an assignor’s obligations during the course of an ABC. Further, assets of the Estate cannot be sold free and clear of existing security interests like in bankruptcy proceedings and the assignor’s debts are not discharged after the Estate’s final distribution. Despite these drawbacks, ABCs make sense for certain distressed companies and creditors should be aware of the process and statutory requirements. Conclusion With distressed businesses now having a more viable alternative to bankruptcy, Nebraska creditors may start to see more debtors use ABCs to resolve their debts. As a result, creditors should familiarize themselves with the distinctions between ABCs and bankruptcies, what they need to do to protect their interests, and the assignee’s duties, obligations and potential liabilities in administering the Estate. Doing so may protect creditors from costly missteps when they participate in the ABC process. 1. Unsecured claims are valued as of the effective date of the Agreement. 16 NEBRASKA BANKER
RxHelp@myphahealth.com (844)742-9675 106 W 3 Street, McCook, NE 69001 rd Take Charge of Your Health! Prescription Education You have the power to be an informed consumer of healthcare. Prioritize Your Health, Starting Today Call PHA Health at (844)742-9675 Participate in our annual Wellness Partners Preventive Care Clinic Talk To Your Doctor Review your medications with your primary care physician at least once a year. If you see multiple doctors for conditions, ensure each physician knows your current medication to avoid potential side effects. Know Your Medications Ensure you understand the purpose, prescribed dosage, storage instructions, expiration date, and side effects of each medication. Don’t skip a dose or alter the prescribed dosage of your medication. Ask About Alternatives Ask if your medication has a generic or another affordable alternative. Call our Rx Advocates to review your medication for opportunities to eliminate or reduce your copay and out-of-pocket cost for your high-cost prescriptions. Live A Healthy Lifestyle Medication cannot replace the importance of a healthy diet and regular exercise. Preventive care gives you an opportunity to recognize and avoid potential future diseases before they even develop. Receive a comprehensive booklet that includes 40+ lab test results Identifying illnesses prior to the onset of symptoms is a key component in lowering your healthcare costs and maintaining quality of life. Visit with our Specialists to create a plan for your success Take your PCC results to your next PCP appointment Call PHA Health to identify which of your prescriptions could be eligible for savings.
FDIC Rescinds Guidance on Multiple Re-Presentment NSF Fees There has been a clear pattern lately of regulatory pullbacks that banks may be tempted to welcome as a return of discretion, flexibility and maybe even freedom. Less guidance, less second-guessing, less pressure on practices that had come under increasing scrutiny. But there is, of course, an important distinction to make — flexibility and certainty aren’t the same thing. When an agency rescinds a meaningful consumer-protection position without replacing it with a clear framework, banks might not actually get a safer runway. In fact, they arguably get a murkier one. In an area like repeated non-sufficient funds (NSF) fees, where the unfairness and deception concerns never really went away (instead being reframed and passed around like a game of hot potato), that may be less reassuring than it first appears, especially given how easily the regulatory pendulum could swing back and recast the same conduct as unfair all along. Which brings us to the latest example: The FDIC has now done exactly what many expected of this leadership team and rescinded FIL-32-2023, the agency’s 2023 guidance on multiple re-presentment NSF fees, effective immediately. In the rescission, the agency said the prior guidance was “overly broad in scope” and created uncertainty about when disclosures regarding re-presentments might still give rise to “unfairness” concerns under Section 5 of the FTC Act. In its place, the FDIC offers a far thinner admonition: Institutions should ensure their disclosures accurately reflect their practices and comply with current law — essentially, the regulatory equivalent of removing the highway guardrails and then posting a sign that says, “Drive Safely.” Again, banks (and industry advocates) can’t be blamed for seeing this as a positive, tidy deregulatory move. One less piece of guidance to worry about, less supervisory friction, more room to lean on disclosure and less danger that a clearly described practice will still be second-guessed as unfair. It also speaks to a longstanding objection — that banks may be the ones charging the fee, but they are not necessarily the ones deciding whether and when a declined payment is run through again (fair being fair, that is often up to the merchant or payee, which we’ll touch on in just a moment). But there’s also simply no denying that this is a retreat. The underlying practice here is not hard to understand — a consumer attempts a payment, the bank declines it for insufficient funds, the merchant or payee resubmits the same item, and the consumer may be charged another NSF fee on Brett Goodnack, JD, CAMS, Compliance Advisor Compliance Alliance 18 NEBRASKA BANKER
the same failed transaction. The FDIC’s earlier guidance had warned that this practice presented heightened risk under Section 5, including not only deception concerns tied to disclosures, but also potential unfairness concerns, even where disclosures existed. The agency has now stepped back from that position — not because repeated fee stacking has been shown to be harmless, but because the FDIC has decided the guidance itself went “too far.” Starting to see the problem? A major issue with multiple re-presentment NSF fees was never just that banks might describe them poorly. It was that consumers often have very little practical control over whether the same item gets run again and, with it, whether another fee gets triggered. The Federal Reserve’s Consumer Compliance Outlook laid that logic out plainly in 2023: Once a bank declines the transaction, the merchant controls the number and timing of re-presentment, but the bank still decides whether to pay or decline the represented transaction, and whether to assess another NSF fee on it. Merchant control doesn’t make the problem go away; in fact, you could argue that it helps explain why consumers often cannot reasonably avoid the harm, while the bank still retains control over whether to convert that re-presentment into yet another charge. What’s worse is that the problem doesn’t disappear merely because an agency decides the old guidance was too broad. That might be what makes the rescission feel so conspicuously one-directional. Here, the FDIC isn’t withdrawing a stale procedural memo or cleaning up some obscure, obsolete footnote. It is backing away from guidance aimed at a fee practice that had drawn sustained criticism precisely because of the way it can stack charges onto the same failed transaction. And it is doing so without replacing that guidance with anything remotely comparable; instead, what remains is little more than a generic, broad reminder. State regulators, meanwhile, are hardly all moving in the same direction. In January 2025, New York’s governor and the Department of Financial Services announced proposed regulations aimed at what they described as exploitative overdraft and NSF practices. Among the proposed restrictions was a prohibition on charging multiple NSF or overdraft fees for the same transaction, including when a merchant resubmits a declined item. Now, this author isn’t naïve enough to think that New York speaks for every state, but New York’s premise here was fairly universal, and that premise wasn’t that the problem could be solved by polishing disclosures. It was that repeat-fee structures like these can themselves be abusive and harmful, particularly to vulnerable consumers, and that banks were expected to respond not just with clearer words, but with actual limits on fee practices and more timely notice to consumers. So, yes — right now, the FDIC is framing this as a course correction against supervisory overbreadth and uncertainty. You could argue that this is also something else: a conscious decision to stop pressing on a fee practice that has been widely criticized as problematic precisely because disclosure alone may not cure the harm. After all, when the same failed transaction can generate fee after fee after fee, the question is not merely whether the account agreement was artfully drafted. It is whether the system is designed to keep charging for the same miss until the miss becomes profitable. Many will treat this as a “pro-bank move,” and a deregulatory sigh of relief. But I’ll caution again — like so many similar federal actions of late, those same folks may want to be careful not to mistake the removal of guidance for the removal of risk. Multiple re-presentment NSF fees still squarely fall within UDAAP territory because the core criticisms of the practice have not changed: the harm can be substantial, the consumer often cannot reasonably avoid it, and disclosure alone may not solve either problem. What has changed is that the FDIC has chosen to step back without putting anything meaningful in its place, leaving institutions with more discretion, less certainty and a cloudier supervisory line to navigate on their own. And when the regulatory pendulum swings back — as it always does — “flexibility” might look a lot like “ambiguity deferred.” LINCOLN BRUNING endacotttimmer.com 402-817-1000 Legal advice. Community banking experience. 19 NEBRASKA BANKER
The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), implemented by Regulation C, was enacted by Congress in 1975. Its primary goals are to promote transparency, determine whether financial institutions (“institution”) are meeting the housing credit needs of their communities and assist in identifying potential discriminatory lending patterns. Regulation C sets out specific requirements for the collection, recording, reporting and disclosure of mortgage lending information. The reporting requirements are incredibly detailed, and examinations allow very few errors before an institution may be required to correct and resubmit past data. HMDA violations can also lead to civil money penalties and/or consent orders from examining agencies. Coverage and Data Reporting Requirements Coverage is based on the prior year’s origination volumes, asset size and location of the institution’s home and retail offices. If the rule is applicable to the institution, it must collect, report and disclose detailed data about home lending activity via a Loan Application Registration (LAR). The institution must submit its HMDA data to its appropriate federal agency by March 1 following the calendar year for which it collected the data and requires electronic submission of the data. The regulation generally applies to consumer-purpose, closed-end loans and open-ended lines of credit that are secured by a dwelling. There are exclusions from coverage if the dwelling type is exempted. There are extremely specific rules on whether business/agricultural transactions are reportable, and there are also certain other transaction types that are specifically excluded under the regulation. At application, HMDA requires lenders to collect certain data related to general loan information, property information, applicant information and institutional identifiers. There are numerous data points to report for each transaction. Partial Reporting Exemption For partial reporting eligible institutions, reporting still may be required, but the burden of reporting all data points may be reduced via a partial exemption. The exemption is based on loan volume and a satisfactory examination history under the Community Reinvestment Act. Partial exemption applies to an eligible institution’s applications for, originations of and purchases of, closed-end mortgage loans, if the institution originated fewer than 500 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding calendar years. Also, a partial exemption applies to an eligible institution’s applications for, originations of and purchases of open-ended lines of credit, if the institution originated fewer than 500 open-ended lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. The partial exemption for closed-end mortgage loans and the partial exemption for open-end lines of credit operate independently of one another. Thus, in a given calendar year, an eligible institution may be able to rely on one partial exemption but not the other. If a covered loan or application is covered by a partial exemption, the institution is required to collect, record and report fewer data points than those of non-eligible institutions, which lessens the burden and decreases the risk of reporting errors. Data Disclosure When HMDA data is submitted and released publicly each year, some information is modified to protect applicant privacy. HMDA data is primarily located on the FFIEC’s HMDA Platform which provides annual LAR data and can be accessed by scanning the QR code. The HMDA data can be used by regulators or others that may have an interest in your lending activity. Since this information becomes publicly available and the data is used as a screening tool for other regulations, such as the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and the Fair Housing Act, accurate reporting is of utmost importance. https://ffiec.cfpb.gov/data-publication/modified-lar Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) Requirements and Recommended Practices Frank Antiga, CPA, CBAP, Risk Advisory Principal S.R. Snodgrass PC 20 NEBRASKA BANKER
Implications and Recommended Practices HMDA compliance requires strong internal controls and specialized knowledge, which may or may not be available at all institutions. Lack of these can result in data inaccuracies or inconsistencies, missing data and discrepancies between the HMDA data and the underlying records. Violations can also lead to a complete review of past data and resubmission of past LARs, which can be quite time-consuming and costly. HMDA continues to be a critical regulation, and we see no end in sight. Here are some recommended practices to ensure your HMDA process to minimize your HMDA risks and ensure compliance: • Board and Senior Management Responsibilities: Ensure adequate oversight and the necessary internal resources to ensure compliance. Ensure all applicable employees understand the importance of accurate reporting. • Policy/Procedures: Create a HMDA policy and detailed procedures to ensure responsible employees can easily access the HMDA requirements. • Training: Provide necessary training to everyone associated with the data collection and reporting process. • Expertise and Staffing: Ensure there is a knowledgeable person(s) to ensure HMDA compliance. Ensure adequate staffing for HMDA reporting. • Internal Controls: Ensure application data collection is well documented and have a thorough review process to ensure data was entered to the LAR correctly. • Internal Audit/HMDA Date Point Scrub: Perform a review of your current processes/procedures, internal controls and a detailed review of your data points by a third party. At Snodgrass, we specialize in the HMDA regulatory and data point/control requirements. We can provide simple tips to help quickly detect potential errors. We provide both internal audits and can perform a complete scrub of your HMDA data points. If you feel you are at risk for noncompliance with HMDA requirements, please contact us if you would like to see how we can help you maintain compliance with this regulation. With more than 20 years of banking and audit experience, including leadership roles at PNC Bank and Sovereign Bank, Frank P. Antiga, CPA, CPAB, brings depth, perspective and steady guidance to financial institutions navigating complex regulatory challenges. His highly valued expertise strengthens internal controls, protects institutions and helps clients move forward with confidence. Founded in 1946, S.R. Snodgrass is a privately held, multi-faceted public accounting and consulting firm, known for innovative tax, assurance, technology and financial advisory services for financial institutions, nonprofits and businesses of all kinds. The firm has worked with more than 175 financial institutions in 16 states and employs more than 90 professionals. The firm is ranked among the country’s top 300 public accounting firms according to Inside Public Accounting’s 2025 list at insidepublicaccounting.com/ipa-top-500-firms. Your Full-Service Bankers' Bank United Bankers' Bank is proud to be the nation's first bankers' bank, serving over 1,000 community banks from the West Coast to the Great Lakes and South Atlantic. We can't wait to share our passion for community banking with you! To Request Pricing Visit ubbRequest.com Contact your Nebraska Calling Officer: Michael Hahn VP, Correspondent Banking Officer michael.hahn@ubb.com ubb.com 21 NEBRASKA BANKER
Artificial intelligence is quickly transforming financial services. For community banks, this shift brings both opportunity and challenge. It can strengthen fraud prevention, improve efficiency and deliver deeper customer insight. At the same time, it is accelerating AI-driven fraud and social engineering threats. Adopting AI isn’t just about adding new tools. To truly benefit and stay protected, banks need to address underlying data readiness gaps. Understanding the Data Readiness Gap Despite having access to vast amounts of data, many institutions struggle to generate timely, reliable insights. Fragmented systems, inconsistent data quality and legacy infrastructure limit their ability to use data effectively. As a result, AI initiatives frequently stall before delivering meaningful results. This challenge is especially pronounced for community and regional financial institutions, which often operate with leaner teams and fewer data resources while facing growing competition from fintechs and larger banks investing heavily in AI. At the core is the growing volume of data. While it should enable better decisions, many organizations lack the foundation to make it usable. Without unified, well-governed data, even strong strategies fail to translate into actionable insight. Several common obstacles contribute to this gap: • Siloed Systems Across Departments: Disconnected platforms prevent a unified view of customers and transactions, limiting visibility across the organization. • Inconsistent or Poor-Quality Data: Inconsistent formats, duplicate records and incomplete fields reduce reliability and undermine confidence in analytics. • Legacy Core Infrastructure: Older systems limit integration and data sharing, making it harder to support modern applications and real-time access. • Lack of Clear Data Ownership and Governance: Lack of ownership leads to inconsistent standards, reducing trust in data and complicating compliance. These challenges collectively create the data readiness gap, and without the infrastructure needed to connect and structure this data, institutions will struggle to unlock its full value. A Strategic Framework for Building AI-Ready Data To compete in a data-driven landscape, institutions must close the data readiness gap. This starts with understanding how data flows across the organization and identifying where visibility is limited. 1. Start With Visibility: Understand Where Insight Breaks Down Before ramping up AI initiatives, identify where the data is being roadblocked. Mapping data flows across systems and departments helps uncover integration gaps and bottlenecks, allowing organizations to prioritize high-impact improvements. Putting this into practice starts with a few essential actions: • Integrate Siloed Systems: Disconnected systems fragment the customer view. Integrating them through APIs or modern platforms helps unify data into a consistent, usable view. • Modernize Data Pipelines: Outdated pipelines slow data movement, which limits Building the Foundation for Effective AI Closing the Data Readiness Gap Ajay John, VP of Data Science & AI CSI 22 NEBRASKA BANKER
responsiveness, while modern tools streamline data flow between systems to improve speed and reliability. • Align Analytics with Business Workflows: Tie insights to clear actions and owners so they drive daily processes, not just sit in dashboards. Understanding these friction points helps prioritize improvements that will deliver measurable business value while creating a clearer path toward unified, decision-ready data. 2. Establish Strong Data Governance Once visibility into data flows is established, the next step is implementing strong data governance. However, many institutions are still working to mature these capabilities. According to CSI’s 2026 Banking Priorities Executive Report, only 11% of community banking leaders rate their data strategy as highly effective, highlighting the need for stronger governance and data management practices. To strengthen governance, institutions should focus on several key areas: • Establish Operational Data Governance: Effective governance means each critical data element has a business owner, a technical owner, a clear definition, a defined lineage path, a quality expectation and an access policy. • Implement Data Quality Monitoring and Controls: Regular validation catches errors early. As banks adopt AI through partners, this also requires strong vendor governance, data-sharing controls and ongoing monitoring. • Embed Compliance and Security from the Start: Strong governance ensures data meets regulatory and cybersecurity requirements. Strong governance improves data quality but also builds the trust necessary to confidently adopt AI-driven insights. 3. Establish Semantic Context for AI Beyond governance and consolidation, institutions must also ensure that their data carries meaningful context. AI systems interpret data based on the information they are given. If data elements lack clear definitions or relationships, AI models may struggle to understand how different data points connect to real-world outcomes. Establishing semantic context helps solve this problem. Semantic context becomes critical when AI must interpret business meaning rather than just process raw data. For instance, in lending, statuses such as “past due,” “deferred” and “restructured” may appear similar across systems but reflect very different levels of risk. Without clear semantic definitions, AI may misclassify borrowers and trigger the wrong actions. By defining what these terms mean, how they relate and where they apply, institutions enable AI to generate more accurate risk insights and support more effective decision-making. With clear semantic context in place, institutions are better positioned to translate data into insights that drive more confident, consistent decisions. Where to Start: Practical First Steps for Growing Teams For community banks with limited staff and tight budgets, closing the data readiness gap doesn’t require a large-scale transformation. The key is to start focused and intentional. A successful AI-readiness effort begins with a clear use case, defined ownership, measurable outcomes, and strong controls for data quality and access. Rather than trying to modernize everything at once, banks can prioritize a high-impact use case, connect only the systems that support it and standardize a small set of critical data. This targeted approach allows institutions to demonstrate value quickly while building a foundation to scale over time. Unlock AI’s Potential Through Data Readiness Artificial intelligence offers financial institutions significant opportunities to improve decision-making, efficiency and customer experience. However, capturing this value requires data that is unified and ready for action. For deeper insights into the technology priorities shaping the industry, scan the QR code to explore the 2026 Banking Priorities Executive Report. https://www.csiweb.com/docs/ banking-priorities-2026/ 23 NEBRASKA BANKER
TECH TALK Crafting an Effective Document Retention Policy Alex Driver, Information Security Consultant SBS CyberSecurity When organizations can’t quickly locate critical records, the consequences can range from regulatory fines to operational setbacks and reputational damage. With expectations from auditors and regulators rising, a well-defined document retention policy is no longer just a compliance requirement, but a strategic business asset that supports business continuity, strengthens data security and enables informed decision-making. What Is Document Retention? Document retention refers to the systematic management, storage and preservation of documents throughout their lifecycle, including how long documents are kept, where they are stored and when they are disposed of. Meeting legal obligations, supporting audits, reducing storage costs and protecting sensitive information are all critical reasons to prioritize a document retention policy. Without one, organizations risk noncompliance, data breaches and operational inefficiencies. Compliance With Legal and Regulatory Requirements Document retention policies provide a structured framework for managing records in accordance with legal and industry standards. These policies help organizations meet the requirements of key regulations, including: • General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): Retain personal data only as long as necessary and dispose of it securely to prevent unauthorized access or misuse. Organizations serving European Union residents must ensure strict compliance to avoid fines and reputational damage. • Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA): Retain medical records according to federal requirements (typically six years) and maintain strict privacy protections. • Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX): Maintain financial records of public companies for a minimum of seven years to ensure regulatory compliance. • Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA): Safeguard customer information and maintain records for defined periods to protect privacy and financial data integrity. In addition to federal laws such as the Internal Revenue Code, organizations must also comply with state-specific regulations and industry standards, which may impose further retention obligations. It’s critical to tailor your policies accordingly. For a comprehensive overview, refer to Record Nations’ State-by-State Record Retention Guide, which is especially helpful for organizations operating across multiple states. How to Build a Bulletproof Retention Policy A robust document retention policy ensures regulatory compliance, protects sensitive data and streamlines workflows. Components include: • Document Categorization: Define and classify documents by type (financial records, HR files, legal documents and customer data) to ensure consistent handling. • Retention Schedules: Establish specific periods for each category, referencing relevant federal, state and industry regulations. • Secure Disposal Protocols: Outline procedures to irretrievably destroy documents after their retention period, reducing privacy and compliance risks. 24 NEBRASKA BANKER
mbr-connect.comRkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODQxMjUw