Compliance Costs Community Banks $4.5 Billion Annually, Survey Shows

Tuesday, December 01, 2015
community bank compliance costs

By Drew Dahl, Economist

Community bankers have been saying for years that complying with the patchwork of banking regulations is expensive. How expensive? $4.5 billion in 2014, according to a 2015 survey.

The survey findings were released during the 2015 Community Banking in the 21st Century research and policy conference—a conference co-sponsored by the Federal Reserve System and the Conference of State Bank Supervisors and hosted by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. The survey was conducted by state banking commissioners and sampled 974 community banks across the country. It asked bankers to identify the amounts attributable to compliance in five categories of operating expenses. The expenses are part, but not necessarily all, of a bank’s overall compliance burden. These costs are likely to exhibit economies of scale—that is, they increase (but at a decreasing rate) with bank size.

It is, of course, a matter of opinion as to whether these costs are appropriately balanced against their benefits in terms of bank safety and consumer protection. But from an objective perspective of profitability, it can be said that they represented 22 percent of community bank net income in 2014. Surveyed banks indicated that regulatory compliance accounted for:

  • 11 percent of their personnel expenses
  • 16 percent of data processing expenses
  • 20 percent of legal expenses
  • 38 percent of accounting  and auditing expenses
  • 48 percent of consulting expenses

To better understand cost impacts, the survey applied these percentages to the aggregated dollar amounts, in each category, across all community banks; thus, the estimated $4.5 billion in compliance costs in these categories alone.

The magnitude of compliance costs is relevant to proposed changes in regulatory requirements that have been discussed over the past year in hearings conducted under the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996. Although the hearings have not yet resulted in any concrete proposals for reducing regulatory burden on community banks, some ideas have emerged. These include raising the asset thresholds at which 12 month (as opposed to 18 month) bank examination cycles are required and increasing the transaction value threshold under which properties securing loans require an appraisal by a state-certified or licensed appraiser.

The underlying objective is to reduce costs among community banks for which regulatory burdens may be disproportionate. As one surveyed banker said, “Small banks cannot afford to efficiently meet the same regulatory and compliance guidelines laid out for ‘big bank’ problems.”    

Additional Resources

Posted In Banking  |  Tagged james fuchsdrew dahldodd-frank actcommunity bankingcompliancecommunity banking in the 21st century
Commenting Policy: We encourage comments and discussions on our posts, even those that disagree with conclusions, if they are done in a respectful and courteous manner. All comments posted to our blog go through a moderator, so they won't appear immediately after being submitted. We reserve the right to remove or not publish inappropriate comments. This includes, but is not limited to, comments that are:
  • Vulgar, obscene, profane or otherwise disrespectful or discourteous
  • For commercial use, including spam
  • Threatening, harassing or constituting personal attacks
  • Violating copyright or otherwise infringing on third-party rights
  • Off-topic or significantly political
The St. Louis Fed will only respond to comments if we are clarifying a point. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters, so please edit your thinking before posting. While you will retain all of your ownership rights in any comment you submit, posting comments means you grant the St. Louis Fed the royalty-free right, in perpetuity, to use, reproduce, distribute, alter and/or display them, and the St. Louis Fed will be free to use any ideas, concepts, artwork, inventions, developments, suggestions or techniques embodied in your comments for any purpose whatsoever, with or without attribution, and without compensation to you. You will also waive all moral rights you may have in any comment you submit.
comments powered by Disqus

The St. Louis Fed uses Disqus software for the comment functionality on this blog. You can read the Disqus privacy policy. Disqus uses cookies and third party cookies. To learn more about these cookies and how to disable them, please see this article.

Subscribe to
On the Economy

Get notified when new content is available on our On the Economy blog.

Email Alerts  |  RSS

About the Blog

The St. Louis Fed On the Economy blog features relevant commentary, analysis, research and data from our economists and other St. Louis Fed experts.

Views expressed are not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis or of the Federal Reserve System.

Contact Us

For media-related questions, email For all other blog-related questions or comments, email