Haw. Code R. § 16-25-37 - Additional disqualification criteria
(a) Managerial
resource test. The presumption that in the absence of credible evidence to the
contrary, a director, officer, or controlling person is of good character and
sound financial standing may be rebutted by evidence to the contrary, including
without limitation a finding that such director, officer, or controlling person
has:
(1) Consented to or suffered a judgment
in any administrative action based upon conduct involving an act of fraud or
dishonesty;
(2) Consented to or
suffered any indictment, formal investigation, examination, or civil or
administrative proceedings that resulted in any agreement, undertaking,
consent, or order issued by any federal or state court, any department, agency,
or commission of the United States government, any state or municipality, any
self-regulatory trade or professional organization, or any foreign government
or governmental entity, which involves an act of fraud or dishonesty;
(3) Been involved in the denial, withdrawal
after receipt of formal or informal notice of an intent to deny, by the
applicant or affiliates of the applicant, of:
(A) Any application relating to the
organization of a financial institution;
(B) An application to acquire any financial
institution, subsidiary or holding company thereof; or
(C) A notice relating to a change in control
of any financial institution, subsidiary or holding company thereof;
or
(4) Been placed in
receivership or conservatorship during the preceding ten years, was a
management official or director of a financial institution which entered into
receivership or conservatorship, was placed in a management consignment
program, or was liquidated during his or her tenure or within two years
thereafter.
(b)
Financial resource and future prospects test. The following factors shall give
rise to a rebuttable presumption that the applicant has not satisfied the
financial resources and future prospects criteria:
(1) Liability for amounts of debt which, in
the opinion of the commissioner, create excessive risks of default and pressure
on the institution;
(2) Failure to
furnish a business plan or furnishing a business plan projecting activities
which are inconsistent with the standards of the financial services
industry.
(c)
Subsections (a) and (b) shall not be deemed an exclusive list of the grounds
upon which the commissioner may find that the relevant criteria have not been
met.
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.