ABA President and CEO Rob Nichols in a press release announcing the lawsuit emphasized the effect of the policy, which as originally proposed would have applied to Fed member banks with more than $1 billion in assets. He said:
The change to the statutory dividend rate upended Federal Reserve System policy that has been in place for more than 100 years… [The highway bill] set a troubling precedent to target specific segments of the business community to meet broad public obligations like highway infrastructure. Every industry in this country is vulnerable if this is allowed to stand.
The litigation seeks to reimburse banks for these improper reductions of the dividend payment. The complaint asserts breach of contract and taking of private property without just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. In 2016, banks lost $1.1 billion to this taking, an amount estimated to balloon to $17 billion over 10 years.
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed announcing the lawsuit, Nichols and Washington Federal Chairman and CEO Roy Whitehead explained their reasoning, defending the 6% dividend as a key factor in the nation’s financial stability. They wrote,
The monetary loss is certainly significant for the industry, especially for smaller banks that will have greater difficulty replacing the lost income. But the bigger concern is the stability of the banking industry’s regulatory architecture and the principle of an honest contract.
Read the op-ed.
Read the lawsuit.
Read FAQs on the litigation.